Do Mail-Order Brides Make "Good Wives?"

[journey4life 0]

i agree i have talked to several now over seas in the philippines and same old thing . I am not trying anymore. I would rather be home alone at night instead of hearing of other problems.

[Dan and Judy 614]

She also looks dead. Quite disturbing on so many levels.

Some goober forgot to poke the air holes in the box.

It does iliminate compliance issues

Edited January 5, 2011 by Dan and Judy

[Krikit 1,166]

Posts with advertising in their signature have been removed. They will be returned to the topic once the poster has complied with the Terms of Service.

[journey4life 0]

Pretty hard to get air in a fed x box

[Dan_RWD 0]

This mail order bride thing is kind of what you hear when you met someone overseas and bring them here anyway , thats just from what i hear anyway.

I hear the mail order bride thing does exist between some countrys but any of these types of realationships is a big risk in my opinion. Good luck to the ones that give this a shot !

The phrase "Mail Order Bride" is often used as a pejorative phrase to denigrate anyone who is married to, or seeking, a partner from a foreign country REGARDLESS of the source of their meeting. It is a phrase lacking any substantive definition because to do so would expose the intellectual dishonesty of those using it in a derogatory manner.

Posts with advertising in their signature have been removed. They will be returned to the topic once the poster has complied with the Terms of Service.

Actually, as as explained in my response, there was no "advertising" involved. I posted the link in the interest of full disclosure and so that folks here would know I have an interest in other sites operating in the same general 'sphere' of the internet as VJ. Nothing more than that - and I promptly removed the link and apologized for any violations as they were purely unintended.

- Dan

[SuperDuper! 230]

A good 40 will supply your health insurance while you goof off and post junk all day on VJ and drink coffee and eat choccy biscuits

A 22 will take your credit card to town and go off with Jose the gardener and pull a Lindsy Lohan on you and her dad is still young enough to punch ya

No contest

Yes, there is a contest, but you are not aware of it. Young, sexy wives rock the old man's world!

[Rebecca Jo 1,962]

Whether or not it's extreme is relative and not really the point. I don't think it was the reality. I look at my grandparents and other elderly couples that I know. For the most part they have balanced, loving relationships. Naturally, I know some elderly people who had bad experiences in relationships and were abused and taken advantage of. But I know roughly as many men for whom this is the case as women. Of course in most cases I only have one side of the story. But I've got no reason to believe that the women were abused while the men are making it up.

When Jenn said "male dominant", I'm pretty sure she didn't mean "dominated" as in abuse. I'm sure she meant that the husband was head of his household not only as the breadwinner, but as the person around whom the family planet revolved. Dad made the money; Dad doled out discipline to the children; Dad had the final say on major purchases; Dad decided where the family vacation was; Dad had the only set of car keys; Mom was always trying to keep the house in a way that pleased Dad.

Once again, nothing is personally directed at you. If you don't feel like you identify with the type of woman talked about in the quote, it's likely that you don't. I certainly don't feel like this quote applies to all or even most women or American women. I happened to be in Russia for a couple years and met a Russian that I decided to marry. But I really don't have anything against American women nor was I driven away from them to look elsewhere.

You have to admit, you hear of lot of the other guys in the RUB forum say the exact opposite of that.

Edited January 5, 2011 by Rebecca Jo

[Captain Oates 911]

Yes, there is a contest, but you are not aware of it. Young, sexy wives rock the old man's world!

Well mine is 11.5 years younger than me and is about normal by my standards. I prefer something with a bit of tread left.

She is number 3.

However, I have experienced this situation from many perspectives and many countries so I do know how it goes

I have had eight young sexy wives - but only 3 were mine

However, that kick will pass - you will see - and you won't regret it when it does. There is life's phase for everything and I would not value a very young one any more than I would a Justin Bieber cd or mp3 or whatever they are called

I tried one 20 years younger and I didn't know what she was on about it terms of music etc and she went off with the Turkish waiter 2 hours after we landed in Turkey !

You can keep all that stuff - a bit of right in the head is my ticket nowadays and they get less flighty once they get a smattering of cellulite. Their insecurity is my security. It's great.

I have had superb looking females and they slip the lead if you are not watching em full time. Not relaxing.

Edited January 5, 2011 by Alan the Red

[SuperDuper! 230]

Well mine is 11.5 years younger than me and is about normal by my standards. I prefer something with a bit of tread left.

She is number 3.

However, I have experienced this situation from many perspectives and many countries so I do know how it goes

I have had eight young sexy wives - but only 3 were mine

However, that kick will pass - you will see - and you won't regret it when it does. There is life's phase for everything and I would not value a very young one any more than I would a Justin Bieber cd or mp3 or whatever they are called

I tried one 20 years younger and I didn't know what she was on about it terms of music etc and she went off with the Turkish waiter 2 hours after we landed in Turkey !

You can keep all that stuff - a bit of right in the head is my ticket nowadays and they get less flighty once they get a smattering of cellulite. Their insecurity is my security. It's great.

I have had superb looking females and they slip the lead if you are not watching em full time. Not relaxing.

Why are you still getting married?

What is your responsibility in all these failed relationships?

Most people don't do the things you do and cannot can't relate to your life experience.

Just sayin'!

Good luck!

[SMR 368]

When Jenn said "male dominant", I'm pretty sure she didn't mean "dominated" as in abuse. I'm sure she meant that the husband was head of his household not only as the breadwinner, but as the person around whom the family planet revolved.

How many women have you met who would put up with not being treated like the planet revolved around them, at least some of the time? I'm not saying that women are self centered so much as that they like to be treated well and smart men know this.

Dad made the money;

Who's really in charge, the person who makes the money or the person who spends it?

Dad doled out discipline to the children;

Sure, but that doesn't mean Dad was any more in charge. Mom and Dad discussed the punishment but, particularly for physical punishment, Dad was just typically the implementer.

Dad had the final say on major purchases; Dad decided where the family vacation was;

I think this is a stretch. Yeah, the man may have been expected to make the arrangements and such with major purchases and vacations. But I don't think you had a lot of marriages where these types of decisions were made unilaterally. Just someone has to walk out and pull the trigger after the discussion had reached a consensus.

Dad had the only set of car keys;

Maybe in some situations but I think it's a stretch to say this was about male domination. A lot of families had only one car with one set of keys. It was typically seen as the man's job to drive and someone had to carry the keys.

Mom was always trying to keep the house in a way that pleased Dad.

And Dad was earning money and purchasing gifts to please Mom. That's my point; people did things to please their spouse. That doesn't mean that one was dominating the other. A lot of your "male domination" is really just a reflection of the fact that, although decisions were discussed by spouses, after a decision was reached one spouse had to go and implement that decision.

And certain tasks were seen as a man's responsibility. Just like the man was expected to change the oil and mow the lawn, he was expected to buy the airplane tickets for vacation and be the one to actually spank the kids. I don't see that as an indication of the man having more power. If my wife and I agree on vacation plans and my wife is the one who actually goes and buys the tickets, I don't consider myself as being dominated.

(In reality, she typically expects me to do it. But I don't see this as me being in charge so much as me working out the details so that she can just enjoy the vacation.)

You have to admit, you hear of lot of the other guys in the RUB forum say the exact opposite of that.

What's your point? I'm sorry I have robbed you of the chance to debate against the views that you assumed that I had due to the fact that I don't support them. Better luck next time.

[Rebecca Jo 1,962]

How many women have you met who would put up with not being treated like the planet revolved around them, at least some of the time? I'm not saying that women are self centered so much as that they like to be treated well and smart men know this.

Who's really in charge, the person who makes the money or the person who spends it?

Sure, but that doesn't mean Dad was any more in charge. Mom and Dad discussed the punishment but, particularly for physical punishment, Dad was just typically the implementer.

I think this is a stretch. Yeah, the man may have been expected to make the arrangements and such with major purchases and vacations. But I don't think you had a lot of marriages where these types of decisions were made unilaterally. Just someone has to walk out and pull the trigger after the discussion had reached a consensus.

Maybe in some situations but I think it's a stretch to say this was about male domination. A lot of families had only one car with one set of keys. It was typically seen as the man's job to drive and someone had to carry the keys.

And Dad was earning money and purchasing gifts to please Mom. That's my point; people did things to please their spouse. That doesn't mean that one was dominating the other. A lot of your "male domination" is really just a reflection of the fact that, although decisions were discussed by spouses, after a decision was reached one spouse had to go and implement that decision.

And certain tasks were seen as a man's responsibility. Just like the man was expected to change the oil and mow the lawn, he was expected to buy the airplane tickets for vacation and be the one to actually spank the kids. I don't see that as an indication of the man having more power. If my wife and I agree on vacation plans and my wife is the one who actually goes and buys the tickets, I don't consider myself as being dominated.

(In reality, she typically expects me to do it. But I don't see this as me being in charge so much as me working out the details so that she can just enjoy the vacation.)

What's your point? I'm sorry I have robbed you of the chance to debate against the views that you assumed that I had due to the fact that I don't support them. Better luck next time.

I was not looking for an argument from you. I think you are being a bit touchy. All I said was your viewpoint is different from a lot of the other males in the RUB forum.

Jenn commented about marriages fifty years ago. Now, I'm 53 years old. I'm not sure of your age. But because I grew up in that era I do think I'm qualified to comment on how family life worked. I might have been a little girl at the time, but I know how things were in our household and my friend's households.

"Male dominated" might sound "bad" but I would contend it should not, at least insofar as a "comparison" to marriages today. I do think things have changed and quite necessarily so. If both partners are working, then household tasks should not fall to just one party. Child rearing takes on different aspects.

We could go further back than 50 years if you like. I'm pretty sure neither of us has personal experience in that arena. History tells us though that the further back in time you go, there was less "equality" for women.

[^_^ 5,021]

I am verypleased with how this thread has turned out. Alan the Red and DAN RWD... thank you.

[SMR 368]

I was not looking for an argument from you. I think you are being a bit touchy. All I said was your viewpoint is different from a lot of the other males in the RUB forum.

Intentions and tone of voice don't often carry well over the internet but your post essentially expected me to either agree with or disagree with the basic RUB views on American vs. FSU women which in reality aren't that uniform or simple and not something that I am prepared to agree with or disagree with wholesale. I stated my opinion and I didn't find it meaningful for you to try and cram it into your pre-determined typical or non-typical RUB forum male categories. I believe that more of the RUB males agree with my original statement, at least to some extent, than you seem to think so your categories are mostly bunk anyway from my perspective.

Jenn commented about marriages fifty years ago. Now, I'm 53 years old. I'm not sure of your age. But because I grew up in that era I do think I'm qualified to comment on how family life worked. I might have been a little girl at the time, but I know how things were in our household and my friend's households.

"Male dominated" might sound "bad" but I would contend it should not, at least insofar as a "comparison" to marriages today. I do think things have changed and quite necessarily so. If both partners are working, then household tasks should not fall to just one party. Child rearing takes on different aspects.

We could go further back than 50 years if you like. I'm pretty sure neither of us has personal experience in that arena. History tells us though that the further back in time you go, there was less "equality" for women.

I'm 24 but I don't really feel that it matters since we're both simply basing this off our experiences and anecdotal evidence. Naturally if you go back further you'll find a time when politically women had much less of a say. Whether that translates to less say in the household is something that varies from culture to culture and house to house.

The original issue is whether or not when someone refers to "traditional marriages" or a "traditional wife" they are referring to submissive wife who doesn't make decisions and does what she's told. Regardless of what happened 50, 100, or 500 years ago, I don't think that's what most men are talking about when they say they are looking for a traditional relationship with their wife.

I think there is some truth to the perception that a traditional marriage refers to one spouse as the primary breadwinner with the other spouse staying at home to take care of the children. There are a lot of problems with a marriage where both spouses have demanding jobs and nobody being home with the kids. For reasons of reproductive biology, it typically works out better for the husband to work and the wife to take care of the kids. If you don't see this type of arrangement as an equal partnership, it's your right to look for a different situation. The same to men who don't want a marriage where both spouses work.

Edited January 5, 2011 by SMR

[Dan_RWD 0]

I am verypleased with how this thread has turned out. Alan the Red and DAN RWD... thank you.

Your most recent post made me realize I had NOT responded to your original post, hence, here you go . . .

By now most of us have seen the 1950’s "The Good Wife's Guide"—the one that tells women that a "Good Wife" is one who acknowledges her husband as master of the house and never questions his authority. The guide is probably a fake that was intended to mock the household dynamics of the post-war generation by imagining a (fictional) era of submissive wives. Did you know, though, that in recent years "The Good Wife's Guide" has taken on a whole new purpose? It is being used as a manifesto for international marriage brokers aiming to convince American men that they deserve obedient wives and that the (again, fictional) 1950s wife can be found in a foreign country.

It must be working. Each year international marriage brokers assist with the importation of tens of thousands of foreign spouses and fiancées into the U.S. It’s big business too; the more than 500 brokers generate an estimated 34 million dollars in revenue from hopeful grooms.

The market size is not why it is an interesting economic problem—to me at least.

Economists are interested in intra-household bargaining—the way that couples decide how resources are allocated within the household. For example, how much time each individual dedicates to paid labor is usually determined through intra-household bargaining. The decision about how many children will be born, and the share of household resources allocated to children, is also determined though intra-household bargaining. Intra-household bargaining determines the division of household chores and time each parent spends on child-rearing. Finally, but importantly, bargaining determines whether or not a couple is having sex and what sex acts are performed.

In other words, most of the decisions that will ultimately determine the welfare of everyone within the household are made through household bargaining.

On the surface, at least, international marriage brokers promote the idea that the advantage of a foreign wife, as opposed to a domestic wife, is that the husband will hold the balance of household decision making power. They sell the idea that foreign brides come from societies in which the social norm is one of male dominance and, as a result, are more willing to accept that arrangement. Don’t take my word for it, consider the following quote from the marriage broker web site www.goodwife.com:

We, as men, are more and more wanting to step back from the types of women we meet now. With many women taking on the "me first" feminist agenda and the man continuing to take a back seat to her desire for power and control many men are turned off by this and look back to having a more traditional woman as our partner.

They also, perhaps less explicitly, promote the notion that women from economically disadvantaged countries will be more grateful for the privileges their western husband can provide and, as a result, be less likely to make demands on his resources.

Do foreign-born wives arrive with any of these expectations? Probably not. In fact, many are sold on the idea that a western husband means more opportunities for decision making within the household—not less. If this is true, then both parties enter the marriage with very different ideas as to how the power within the household will be allocated. I don’t doubt that when two people marry who having very different ideas of how decisions will be made, that conflict is created. It is perhaps that conflict that is contributing to the high level of abuse documented in these relationships.*

Despite a vast economic literature on household bargaining and well-being, there has been nothing done, to my knowledge, on bargaining within households in which the wife is a mail-order bride. If that changes—which I hope it does—you can be certain that I will let you know.

http://bigthink.com/ideas/26403

Your cite is drawn from Jane Kim's article appearing in the Virginia Journal of International Law entitled; "Trafficked: Domestic Violence, Exploitation in Marriage, and the Foreign Bride Industry". We recently opened a topic at RWD (along with the entire original article for download and review) to address this article by Ms. Kim - a J.D. candidate in her third year at Columbia Law School. I would post a link to it at RWD but am unsure of forum policy and do not wish to violate any rules.

There are numerous logic flaws in Ms. Kim's article - not the least of which are her grand leaps as evidenced in one instance in your citation above.

You also fail to note that Ms. Kim stakes out the following position as underpinning her entire work:

the foreign-bride industry constitutes trafficking under international law and should therefore be criminalized and prosecuted.

And she goes on to vilify and attempt to criminalize all persons of the male gender involved IN ANY WAY with marriage to a foreign spouse, as well as anyone of any gender who has anything to do with facilitating introductions.

You should find and review the article. You might find it illuminating - though possibly not in the way you had imagined (assuming, of course, it is read with an open and critical mind).

- Dan

Edited January 5, 2011 by Dan_RWD

[Captain Oates 911]

Why are you still getting married?

What is your responsibility in all these failed relationships?

Most people don't do the things you do and cannot can't relate to your life experience.

Just sayin'!

Good luck!

No need to shout with capitals you know...It is very bad manners and not doing it is essential web etiquette.

You should look up the statistics on people married more than once - I am not unusual - perhaps you are ?

Give it a few years and see if you don't pick up a few of life's scars as you go along. Are you being holier than thou ?

I was married 14 years the first time and she went off with an eighteen year old boy when we were 36

He lived at home with his parents and was unemployed and he had a pedal cycle with no lights on it. My son was thirteen and my daughter 10. She carried on the affair for 6 month before I got to know even though my neighbours and parents knew. It was my dad who told me.

Now, would you like to write a reply (without shouting and using capitals) giving your theory on how that was my fault ?

You should not be so judgmental about people with only a few facts to hand.

Edited January 5, 2011 by Alan the Red