# Our state does not allow us to marry.



## Russell Williams (Jul 23, 2009)

My partner and I

My partner and I have known each other since about 1982. The laws of the state of Maryland do not allow us to be married. A week from today we will have a commitment ceremony. The commitment ceremony will be in a local park. After the commitment ceremony we will go to a local Methodist Church for a commitment ceremony party. From there we will go to the NAAFA convention for our (if a couple that gets married has a honeymoon what does a couple that becomes committed have -- a corn syrup moon?). If circumstances change at some later time my partner and I may become married.

Russell Williams


----------



## mergirl (Jul 23, 2009)

Why can't you marry? I mean, what in the Law says you can't?


----------



## Shosh (Jul 23, 2009)

Not allowing you and your partner to marry is a violation of your human rights Russell, end of story.
I am very sorry to hear this.


----------



## steely (Jul 23, 2009)

I'm sorry to hear that. People who love each other should be able to marry. It's very simple except when the government gets involved. Congratulations on your Commitment Ceremony, many continued years of happiness.


----------



## mergirl (Jul 23, 2009)

Susannah said:


> Not allowing you and your partner to marry is a violation of your human rights Russell, end of story.
> I am very sorry to hear this.



Totally?! Its Article 12 of the European Human rights act- The right to marry. 
Whats the deal with America?


----------



## crayola box (Jul 23, 2009)

mergirl said:


> Why can't you marry? I mean, what in the Law says you can't?




I was wondering the same thing. The only legal prohibitions I can think of involve same sex couples, blood relatives, and not having a legal separation/divorce. But I am not very familiar with the particulars of Maryland law, so would be interested to know if there is something unique to Maryland as opposed to other states?

Anyway congratulations on the happy union.


----------



## butch (Jul 23, 2009)

I have to say, I'm confused, Russell. I've been familiar with you since the late 80's, because I was a member of NAAFA, and in all that time, I've only known you to date women. Is the partner you refer to a woman or a man? If it is indeed a woman, then what in Maryland's laws prevent you two from marrying? If it is a man, then as you may know, the Attorney General of Maryland is currently researching the possibility of recognizing same sex marriages from other jurisdictions. If that does happen, you and your partner could fly to massachusetts and get married, and have Maryland recognize it when you return.

Thanks for clarifying your post.


----------



## Ned Sonntag (Jul 23, 2009)

That's kinda romantic but Russell's like the uber-FA. If he's gone gay it means we all will. Not that there's anything wrong with that.:doh:


butch said:


> I have to say, I'm confused, Russell. I've been familiar with you since the late 80's, because I was a member of NAAFA, and in all that time, I've only known you to date women. Is the partner you refer to a woman or a man? If it is indeed a woman, then what in Maryland's laws prevent you two from marrying? If it is a man, then as you may know, the Attorney General of Maryland is currently researching the possibility of recognizing same sex marriages from other jurisdictions. If that does happen, you and your partner could fly to massachusetts and get married, and have Maryland recognize it when you return.
> 
> Thanks for clarifying your post.


----------



## BeautifulPoeticDisaster (Jul 23, 2009)

I bet the issue is that one of them was married in the past and did not take the time to divorce. That's my best guess.


----------



## fffff (Jul 23, 2009)

Does this have something to do with the chairs in the courthouse? 

Otherwise there's kind of a glaring omission as to why you can't get married.


----------



## BeautifulPoeticDisaster (Jul 23, 2009)

fffff said:


> Does this have something to do with the chairs in the courthouse?
> 
> Otherwise there's kind of a glaring omission as to why you can't get married.




OH! good call with the chairs!!!! I think you've won!

What prevents you from bringing a sturdy chair/bench stool to the courthouse if marriage is that important!!??


----------



## fatgirlflyin (Jul 23, 2009)

Russell Williams said:


> My partner and I
> 
> My partner and I have known each other since about 1982. The laws of the state of Maryland do not allow us to be married. A week from today we will have a commitment ceremony. The commitment ceremony will be in a local park. After the commitment ceremony we will go to a local Methodist Church for a commitment ceremony party. From there we will go to the NAAFA convention for our (if a couple that gets married has a honeymoon what does a couple that becomes committed have -- a corn syrup moon?). If circumstances change at some later time my partner and I may become married.
> 
> Russell Williams




ummmm aren't you and your "partner" each married to different people already?


----------



## mossystate (Jul 23, 2009)

fffff said:


> Does this have something to do with the chairs in the courthouse?
> 
> Otherwise there's kind of a glaring omission as to why you can't get married.





* waits until enough people, like me, have responded in his thread, before he decides he has enough of a crowd to tell us the reason why...etc...etc.. *


----------



## Russell Williams (Jul 23, 2009)

"I bet the issue is that one of them was married in the past and did not take the time to divorce. That's my best guess."
__________________

All that I said about the situation is true but some people assumed that the only committment ceremonies would be between couples of the same sex.

Louise is female.

However Maryland does not allow someone to be married to two people at the same time.

As best I understood and remember the situation while we were still together my wife did not much like me, did not like my friends, was fearful of me being around her friends because of what i might do or say, did not like my son or my daughter, did not like most activities I was involved in, ( including church) and hated the fact that I felt that we should not spend more money then we made.

So bit over two years ago when she went to AZ to visit her sick mother I sent her divorce papers. My altustic daugher commented "She is happy in AZ, she should stay there."

Two of my friends said, "What took you so long."

That was two years ago. My wife apparently wants to stay married to me for as long as possible and it is beginning to look like the earliest I will actually be divorced is sometime in the spring of 2010. So my partner decied that she was tired of waiting and wanted to do a committment ceremony.

An interesting side light is that for two or three years before the separation my wife almost always refused my requests to attend church with me.

Now she goes to chruch most every sunday and so in church upon occasion there will be my daugher in front, my friend and I in the next pew, and sometimes my wife in the next row. After church at times we have all gone to the same Sunday School class.

Russell Williams


----------



## mossystate (Jul 23, 2009)

The state of Washington will not allow me to get married, because I do not have a partner. Fuckers.


Ok, I think this thread is for the lounge. I see nothing pertaining to size/size acceptance issues. See, if the chair angle had been brought up.


----------



## TraciJo67 (Jul 23, 2009)

Russell Williams said:


> However Maryland does not allow someone to be married to two people at the same time.



Are there any other states that allow people to be married to multiple partners, Russell? Coz I've got a few wealthy candidates in mind, and I'd really rather not bother with the hassle of dumping my current spouse. 

Why did you post this, Russell? Do you think that your issue bears any similarity at all to the fact that same-sex couples cannot marry (or face significant barriers to doing so)?


----------



## BeautifulPoeticDisaster (Jul 23, 2009)

*does the omg I was right dance!!!!*


----------



## Surlysomething (Jul 23, 2009)

Is it just me or wtf? :doh:


Mind-boggled, every single day.


----------



## LoveBHMS (Jul 23, 2009)

Sorry but this really pisses me off.

Russell, the chairs are one thing. Harrassing innocent office staff in doctors' offices about armless chairs are one thing...but when you very clearly and deliberately take the issue of gay marriage and twist it an attempt to gain sympathy, well then you just really infuriate me.

Your post referred to "my partner" and "state law" in a clear attempt to imply that your partner was a man. I'm willing to guess that anyone reading it who is not personally acquainted with you would believe you were referring to a same sex relationship. You say "my state" won't allow it, as if *any* state allows polygamy. You are not facing any sort of discrimination because you can't get married to somebody when you *are already married.* There is no bigotry or discrimination here...NONE.

I also have to hope that anyone involved in your "committment ceremony" is aware that you're married.


----------



## thatgirl08 (Jul 23, 2009)

LoveBHMS said:


> Sorry but this really pisses me off.
> 
> Russell, the chairs are one thing. Harrassing innocent office staff in doctors' offices about armless chairs are one thing...but when you very clearly and deliberately take the issue of gay marriage and twist it an attempt to gain sympathy, well then you just really infuriate me.
> 
> ...



My thoughts exactly.


----------



## fffff (Jul 23, 2009)

LoveBHMS said:


> Sorry but this really pisses me off.
> 
> Russell, the chairs are one thing. Harrassing innocent office staff in doctors' offices about armless chairs are one thing...but when you very clearly and deliberately take the issue of gay marriage and twist it an attempt to gain sympathy, well then you just really infuriate me.
> 
> ...



What I read from this is, "if gay people can get married, why not polygamy? Why can't people marry pineapples? Or oak trees?"


----------



## Mathias (Jul 23, 2009)

Russell Williams said:


> "I bet the issue is that one of them was married in the past and did not take the time to divorce. That's my best guess."
> __________________
> 
> All that I said about the situation is true but some people assumed that the only committment ceremonies would be between couples of the same sex.
> ...



Well you did a piss poor job of clearing that up from the get go.


----------



## LoveBHMS (Jul 23, 2009)

fffff said:


> What I read from this is, "if gay people can get married, why not polygamy? Why can't people marry pineapples? Or oak trees?"



In most states in the US, gays can't marry but they can in MA and Hawaii. By saying "our state does not allow" it implies that any state allows polygamy which is not the case.

Russell never said "if gays can marry why not me?" and I believe in reading the original post that he meant to imply he was the victim of discrimination which is just not the case.


----------



## TraciJo67 (Jul 23, 2009)

LoveBHMS said:


> In most states in the US, gays can't marry but they can in MA and Hawaii. By saying "our state does not allow" it implies that any state allows polygamy which is not the case.
> 
> Russell never said "if gays can marry why not me?" and I believe in reading the original post that he meant to imply he was the victim of discrimination which is just not the case.



Actually, I suspect that he posted in an intentionally inflammatory way because he thought that he was giving us an "a-ha, made you think" moment; I doubt that he truly was implying that he's a victim of discrimination (could be wrong about this; wouldn't surprise me). For some reason, I'm even more annoyed by the obfuscation than I am by the possibility that he was comparing himself to gays who wish to marry. 

It wasn't in the slightest bit funny or educational, Russell. If you were in some way attempting to compare your situation, that's just ... beyond pathetic. 

And as an aside, nice way of fobbing responsibility onto your ex as the reason why you aren't already divorced, Russell . Had you been extremely MOTIVATED to get that piece of paper, I don't think you'd have allowed her apathy (for whatever the reason on her part) to be a stumbling block in obtaining it, not yesterday, not tomorrow, not sometime in 2010.


----------



## LoveBHMS (Jul 23, 2009)

_Under Maryland law, there are two kinds of "no-fault" divorce. 
After 1 year of mutual and voluntary separation, with no hope or 
expectation of reconciliation, either party can obtain an absolute 
divorce. "Mutual and voluntary" means that both parties agreed to 
separate, that they did so without any coercion or threat, and that 
they intended to end their marriage. *After 2 years of separation for 
any reason, either spouse can obtain an absolute divorce*. (Even a 
philandering and abusive spouse who stays away for 2 years is 
entitled to a divorce.)_

It occured to me after reading Russell's 'explanation' for why he could not marry his partner, that most states would have a provision for abandonment and/or seperation. I'm not a lawyer, but it hit me that the concept of "no fault divorce" must come into play in a situation where one party has voluntarily lived away from the other for over two years.

I looked up Maryland family law and found the above. It came from a law firm website and of course contains the usual and necessary disclaimers about text on a website not replacing legal advice. However, if the above is accurate, it would seem that Russell could obtain a divorced if he wanted.


----------



## Shosh (Jul 23, 2009)

Well not knowing Russell I totally read that wrong.


----------



## Elfcat (Jul 23, 2009)

So, OK, Russell, if you're in such close proximity with your wife, then why is it going to take so long to divorce? You haven't gone to an attorney and attempted to force the issue?

I'm sorry things went so badly, but it's obvious the law does not say that you'll NEVER be allowed to marry Louise (I assume it's Louise). So you'll be committed informally, and hopefully things will fall into place in time.


----------



## Les Toil (Jul 23, 2009)

Marriage aside, I'm just devastated Russell actually came back and addressed a thread he had started. Not sure if it'll happen again, but hell. We should still be thankful.


----------



## LisaInNC (Jul 23, 2009)

There is no reason he cant get an absolute divorce as long as his wife has been properly served. If she refuses service he can then serve her by publishing it in the newspaper. In an absolute divorce, she doesnt even have to show up for a court date, nor does he. I think he is full o shit and just wanted to get a topic started.


----------



## Mini (Jul 23, 2009)

Russel, you're truly the Rosa Parks of our generation.


----------



## Russell Williams (Jul 23, 2009)

TraciJo67 said:


> .
> 
> And as an aside, nice way of fobbing responsibility onto your ex as the reason why you aren't already divorced, Russell . Had you been extremely MOTIVATED to get that piece of paper, I don't think you'd have allowed her apathy (for whatever the reason on her part) to be a stumbling block in obtaining it, not yesterday, not tomorrow, not sometime in 2010.



Again making an assumption with inadequate knowledge of the situation. (something people often do when hearing news about a variety of situations-the black college professor and the policeman and the president who said stupid is an example of people making assumptions while other say the full story is not out) (another personal example that we are all aware of is those who insist that all fat people have to do is eat less and they will be thin. If we are going to argue that people should not make assumptions about why we are fat then we should try to make sure that we do not make assumptions about other things that may not be related to fat issues)


Actually I have been to court 2 times so far trying to get a divorce, In both instance my wife fought and won her battle to keep the divorce from happening. She has been sent settlement proposales that she has never responded to. She has been given divorce papers claiming that we have been separated for two year and she has never responded. However if you have suggestions about how to move the process forward faster that my own lawyer is unaware of then I am interested.

Russell Williams


----------



## Russell Williams (Jul 23, 2009)

Elfcat said:


> So, OK, Russell, if you're in such close proximity with your wife, then why is it going to take so long to divorce? You haven't gone to an attorney and attempted to force the issue?
> 
> I'm sorry things went so badly, but it's obvious the law does not say that you'll NEVER be allowed to marry Louise (I assume it's Louise). So you'll be committed informally, and hopefully things will fall into place in time.



I also hope that things will fall into place and the the lovely and wonderful Louise Wolfe will eventually consent to honor me with marrying me. 

I do not know why it is taking so long to get the divorce. One posibility, and only a posibility, is that because my wife has very serious medical problems and I have very good medical insurance she is not in a hurry to lose the medical benifits that come with being married to me, but really I do not know why she is not anxious to be divorced.


----------



## mossystate (Jul 23, 2009)

sdfbvosdbvsbspdbhsdibsidbpisdbhsid;abisdbg;ioqwdrsbvhSIBNSIDBKSBDBSIBHSIDHBPSBHKIBPPIHIPHIOnspdbsdnvknadbvz;ldxvzsdbnsbdkbvsdv a;duabdnbnksd;bshdbskdbshdnkbsndnv;lskdvj;skldnv;nskdnvksndvklnhsdnvskdnb s[ssdnbsn'[dlbushdnbnsd'boruew-rhewrnrbvlsd[bhsd]blsdnb[sodbhsdnbvs[dvh[fucknvksdphvsidhpbksndk;bnkdnbsljesuschristndkvpsdbksdbbk;sdbkhspdkvsbpkkdnslknkvppsohklb;bkn;pvbspbdnbs;dpbsdnhpndkarmlesschairssndkbpsdhbsihbispidhjp[setupdbkspdbpshpknkndkpihpcostcosdnkb;sdkhbbs;dkn;knh;skhnk;snkpdfhbisnkdn;loj[ojsn'[lojffsnksdpbhsnhstfusnk[dbhios[db[n[shutpsdnbksdnhbkthe sd[sdbhsofuckdskgns[dohjup.


----------



## Mini (Jul 23, 2009)

mossystate said:


> sdfbvosdbvsbspdbhsdibsidbpisdbhsid;abisdbg;ioqwdrsbvhSIBNSIDBKSBDBSIBHSIDHBPSBHKIBPPIHIPHIOnspdbsdnvknadbvz;ldxvzsdbnsbdkbvsdv a;duabdnbnksd;bshdbskdbshdnkbsndnv;lskdvj;skldnv;nskdnvksndvklnhsdnvskdnb s[ssdnbsn'[dlbushdnbnsd'boruew-rhewrnrbvlsd[bhsd]blsdnb[sodbhsdnbvs[dvh[fucknvksdphvsidhpbksndk;bnkdnbsljesuschristndkvpsdbksdbbk;sdbkhspdkvsbpkkdnslknkvppsohklb;bkn;pvbspbdnbs;dpbsdnhpndkarmlesschairssndkbpsdhbsihbispidhjp[setupdbkspdbpshpknkndkpihpcostcosdnkb;sdkhbbs;dkn;knh;skhnk;snkpdfhbisnkdn;loj[ojsn'[lojffsnksdpbhsnhstfusnk[dbhios[db[n[shutpsdnbksdnhbkthe sd[sdbhsofuckdskgns[dohjup.



Mossy, are you having a stroke?


----------



## mossystate (Jul 23, 2009)

Mini said:


> Mossy, are you having a stroke?



Quit moving, and I might.













i need food..low blood sugar


----------



## Russell Williams (Jul 23, 2009)

Elfcat said:


> I'm sorry things went so badly, but it's obvious the law does not say that you'll NEVER be allowed to marry Louise (I assume it's Louise). So you'll be committed informally, and hopefully things will fall into place in time.



It is so wonderful that after 25 years and many misteps and mistakes and misunderstanding on both of our parts I am now with the truly wonderful Louise Wolfe. A dream that I had realized would never be a reality has become a reality, a opportunity missed has now become an opportunity that has been realized. Louise makes me so happy and I try to bring happiness into her life. As you know so well she is so wonderful.

To be able to spend my days with Louse is such joy.

I could go on but telling people more about how wonderful she is and how happy she makes me might quickly bore those not already bored by the topic.

She is soft and beautiful and brillent and gracious and spells well and is an effective leader and a prize winning speaker and this maganificant package chooses to spend her time with me when there are so many other who are richer and more handsome and wiser and healthier then I. I am very lucky and I try to tell her so very often.

Russell.


----------



## exile in thighville (Jul 23, 2009)

Russell Williams said:


> spells well



if only you could put her on speed dial for emergencies


----------



## exile in thighville (Jul 23, 2009)

like this thread


----------



## Weeze (Jul 23, 2009)

What the hell is going on here?

I'm confused as to why this thread exists....???


----------



## Mathias (Jul 23, 2009)

mergirl said:


> Why can't you marry? I mean, what in the Law says you can't?



Because he conveniently left out the part where he wasn't divorced in his original and insinuated that he was homosexual in a bullshit attempt to gain sympathy.


----------



## mossystate (Jul 23, 2009)

krismiss said:


> What the hell is going on here?
> 
> I'm confused as to why this thread exists....???



I bet you were all sleepy eyed and scratching yourself when you typed that. Right?


----------



## LoveBHMS (Jul 24, 2009)

Congratulations Russell, I hope you and Louise have many happy years together and that her spelling abilities bring both of you much joy.

I don't know about anyone else, but you've pissed me off royally twice now, once by cribbing the gay marriage issue and now by oh-so-casually mentioning that your wife needs health insurance and can only get it by being married to you. I don't know the situation with you and your legal spouse, but the need for health care is very serious. If she is unable to work and the only access she has to health care is your legal marriage, that is probably why she is fighting it.

OTOH as Lisa and I both pointed out, your wife has voluntarily lived apart from you for over two years. You can get an absolute divorce if you so choose. Candidly it seems as though if doing so would deny your wife the health benefits she needs, it would be a really mean thing to do.


----------



## mossystate (Jul 24, 2009)

Yeah. Somebody with SERIOUS MEDICAL ISSUES, not wanting to be without decent medical care...I cannot imagine why she is not skipping to sign papers. I had not read that post before I saw LovesBHMS post.


Russell, could it be that YOU are the one who is dangling this carrot? Does this give you some damned cheap thrill, thinking about how you, in large part, have this womans medical health in your hands?


SICK. 

What are you waiting for? 


" Not in any hurry to lose the medical benifits( sp ) ". Cold and sadistic.


----------



## Weeze (Jul 24, 2009)

mossystate said:


> I bet you were all sleepy eyed and scratching yourself when you typed that. Right?


This thread makes me tired. I need a chair.


----------



## Les Toil (Jul 24, 2009)

it's a mean thing Russell wants to marry the person he loves instead of staying married to someone he has fallen out of love with so that person can continue to get medical care?? I have great empathy for her, but the man definitely deserves to move on with his life and be with the one he loves. Oddly enough I find it extremely mean-spirited and selfish to show up in court time after time to deny someone a divorce just so they can continue to reap medical benefits. There's no one here that would be hunky-dory with that situation if you were in the shoes of Russell's wannabe fiancée.

I feel empathy for his wife's struggle with our horrifically disastrous medical system just as I feel empathy for soooo many close friends of mine who can't afford to even have a sprained finger dealt with. I'd have even more empathy for russell's wife if she became ill due to russell having any feeder/gainer propencitiies which supposedly had something to do with his previous wife's severe physical condition. Correct me if I'm wrong, Russell.


----------



## LoveBHMS (Jul 24, 2009)

Les Toil said:


> it's a mean thing Russell wants to marry the person he loves instead of staying married to someone he has fallen out of love with so that person can continue to get medical care?? I have great empathy for her, but the man definitely deserves to move on with his life and be with the one he loves. Oddly enough I find it extremely mean-spirited and selfish to show up in court time after time to deny someone a divorce just so they can continue to reap medical benefits. There's no one here that would be hunky-dory with that situation if you were in the shoes of Russell's wannabe fiancée.
> 
> I feel empathy for his wife's struggle with our horrifically disastrous medical system just as I feel empathy for soooo many close friends of mine who can't afford to even have a sprained finger dealt with. I'd have even more empathy for russell's wife if she became ill due to russell having any feeder/gainer propencitiies which supposedly had something to do with his previous wife's severe physical condition. Correct me if I'm wrong, Russell.



No, it's not mean to want a divorce and want to be with the person you love. It is not however, either mean spirited or selfish to deny somebody a divorce if it would mean losing your only means to health care when you have serious health problems. We're not talking about somebody not wanting to not drive an expensive car or keep a country club membership.

"Reaping medical benefits" is not exactly a frivolous thing. If she needs them, she needs them.


----------



## TraciJo67 (Jul 24, 2009)

LoveBHMS said:


> No, it's not mean to want a divorce and want to be with the person you love. It is not however, either mean spirited or selfish to deny somebody a divorce if it would mean losing your only means to health care when you have serious health problems. We're not talking about somebody not wanting to not drive an expensive car or keep a country club membership.
> 
> "Reaping medical benefits" is not exactly a frivolous thing. If she needs them, she needs them.



I'm loathe to defend Russell, but I'm with Les on this one. I don't think that Russell is under any moral (far less legal) obligation to stay married to his wife because she has a medical condition and needs the insurance. There are other options, including considering this in the divorce settlement -- or medicare/medicaid. 

If the marriage is over in all aspects but paper, and Russell has found someone who makes him happy, he has every right to pursue his own happiness.


----------



## swordchick (Jul 24, 2009)

I agree with you and Les. He should be able get a divorce and marry the woman that he truly loves. There are other things that Russell's wife can do to deal with her medical condition.

I would like to say that I like Russell. He was so kind to me at Dims Bash. And I could see that he clearly loves his fiancee.

I wish you the best, Russell.



TraciJo67 said:


> I'm loathe to defend Russell, but I'm with Les on this one. I don't think that Russell is under any moral (far less legal) obligation to stay married to his wife because she has a medical condition and needs the insurance. There are other options, including considering this in the divorce settlement -- or medicare/medicaid.
> 
> If the marriage is over in all aspects but paper, and Russell has found someone who makes him happy, he has every right to pursue his own happiness.


----------



## crayola box (Jul 24, 2009)

Although I have lurked for years i am new to posting so will limit my speculation to asking if there are perhaps pertinent facts missing.

My skepticism comes from the fact that the OP said he doesn't know why she won't consent to divorce, while at the same time throwing in the health insurance issue. Likewise he said she hasn't shown in court or answered papers, but at the same time has rejected settlement offers. You can't claim both. I am not an attorney, only a law student, but, to me, this reads like a story with major holes. I can see the valid arguments on both sides of the aisle: on the one hand it is cruel to deny someone their only chance at medical coverage, but on the other it is unfair to not be able move on in life and remarry. That however assumes that the facts are exactly as presented by the OP, but I think there must be more to the situation. 

I live in a state where there is no such thing as no-fault divorce, this makes it infinitely harder to obtain an amicable divorce and I have read many cases where both people in the marriage wanted out and legally were unable to obtain the decree (obviously this is not the case the majority of the time) Generally in this country, you cannot avoid a divorce simply by ignoring the papers, so I doubt that simply not showing up in court the last two years is what has kept them married (especially if there are no kids or other complications). Given this, my mind then jumps to the statement that she was offered fair settlements and has rejected them. Umm. fair to whom? Ofcourse I do not know anything about this couples life but perhaps the settlements the OP considers fair, are not considered to be fair by his wife, we are only getting one side of the story. 

Anyway those were just some of the thoughts running through my head as I was reading this thread. I didnt really think I would care much beyond the initial curiousity as to the reason they couldn't marry but then I think I figured out what about all this was bothering me. I have read so many stories of women (though I am sure it happens to men too) who because of their culture, religion, local law etc. were not granted divorces and forced to stay in agonizing and sometimes abusive relationships. These stories are always so hard to wrap my mind around because it seemed so natural that in the U.S. if you dont want to be married to someone, you don't have to be (though I realize out marriage laws are not perfect by any means including not letting same sex couples marry, and assigning fault in divorce etc.). Because of this, I guess, the explanation of why he can't remarry read to me like someone trying to play the victim when perhaps they are not so innocent. Again this is just my initial impression, and I concede that additional details might change my mind. 

One other thing to the OP (I am unsure if this sentence violates board rules so if it does, mods please delete): Even in my short time here I can see why people are reacting with hurt and anger. Many of them seem to go quite far back with you, and seemingly knew the situation. And yet based on the way you phrased your post, they gave you the benefit of the doubt and asked if you were a same sex couple. You responded by telling them not to assume things. Though it may not have been your intention, behaving in this way makes people feel like you purposely waited for them to reach the wrong conclusion just so you can correct them, basically fanning flames.


----------



## Emma (Jul 24, 2009)

I think we should all just stop replying to him. No one likes him, he annoys us all and he's constantly trying to wind us up. He reminds me of that vince guy from years back.


----------



## mossystate (Jul 24, 2009)

TraciJo67 said:


> If the marriage is over in all aspects but paper, and Russell has found someone who makes him happy, he has every right to pursue his own happiness.



I agree. I am more disgusted by his seemingly flippant attitude. The nuts and bolts of the situation are that he does get to be with the person he loves. I am just amazed at the ' I don't get why '.


----------



## 1300 Class (Jul 24, 2009)

> Because he conveniently left out the part where he wasn't divorced in his original and insinuated that he was homosexual in a bullshit attempt to gain sympathy.


+1, had to be said. 



> I think we should all just stop replying to him. No one likes him, he annoys us all and he's constantly trying to wind us up. He reminds me of that vince guy from years back.


I agree. 
--
Why can't you just come out and say what you mean instead of dancing about with half facts, whispers, inuendo and and which has manifested itself as a cry by you for either attention or sympathy. Bully for you that your with someone you love, however just give the full picture next time and call a spade a spade instead.


----------



## mergirl (Jul 24, 2009)

Mathias said:


> Because he conveniently left out the part where he wasn't divorced in his original and insinuated that he was homosexual in a bullshit attempt to gain sympathy.



Ahhh.. See, if he had just metioned this in his OP people might have reac...hmmm no actually they probably wouldn't have! It would be madness if you could just be married to as many people as you wanted. It would be a legal nightmare. I'm sure i watched a program about Mormons in Ohio with lots of wives though, maby he should become a mormon and move to ohio. 
I could say a bit more here but i have taken the decision to go make some lunch instead. 
William, what can i say, You live in a very unfair country. You should be allowed to take on as many wives as you want. When everyone has the right to marry 'one' person they love in your country maby then i will have more sympathy for your plight. I cant guarantee this though mind!


----------



## butch (Jul 24, 2009)

Perhaps this is mean of me, but Russell's post reminds me why I tend to dismiss the anti-gay marriage people's claims of the 'sanctity of marriage,' since this is, what, Russell's third marriage? Why can straight people get married multiple times, and gays never? Makes a mockery of the whole thing, if you believe the institution is sacred, and shows the hypocrisy of any state denying two committed adults the right to join in a union recognized by all as the ultimate in romantic attachment.


----------



## mergirl (Jul 24, 2009)

butch said:


> Perhaps this is mean of me, but Russell's post reminds me why I tend to dismiss the anti-gay marriage people's claims of the 'sanctity of marriage,' since this is, what, Russell's third marriage? Why can straight people get married multiple times, and gays never? Makes a mockery of the whole thing, if you believe the institution is sacred, and shows the hypocrisy of any state denying two committed adults the right to join in a union recognized by all as the ultimate in romantic attachment.



I agree totally and i don't think its mean at all.


----------



## fatgirlflyin (Jul 24, 2009)

Les Toil said:


> I'd have even more empathy for russell's wife if she became ill due to russell having any feeder/gainer propencitiies which supposedly had something to do with his previous wife's severe physical condition. Correct me if I'm wrong, Russell.




If her health conditions have to do with feederism within their marriage she is just as at fault as Russell. Don't get me wrong, I think if someone helped to create a situation they should help fix it, and as much as I hate to admit it I don't want to see all the fault lie with Russel if that's the case. 


This is my biggest fear for people who enter into relationships where feederism is at play. They gain so much weight, or develop health problems due to the weight that they gained for their partner (or themselves, or both), then when the relationship ends for whatever reason they are left struggling.


----------



## Les Toil (Jul 24, 2009)

Ella Bella said:


> If her health conditions have to do with feederism within their marriage she is just as at fault as Russell. Don't get me wrong, I think if someone helped to create a situation they should help fix it, and as much as I hate to admit it I don't want to see all the fault lie with Russel if that's the case.
> 
> 
> This is my biggest fear for people who enter into relationships where feederism is at play. They gain so much weight, or develop health problems due to the weight that they gained for their partner (or themselves, or both), then when the relationship ends for whatever reason they are left struggling.



Strong agreement all around Ella. 

And Russell, if you're still around, address the rumors that you've encouraged your ex's to gain severe amounts of weight. I do believe his second wife passed away at a fairly young age.


----------



## frankman (Jul 24, 2009)

Les Toil said:


> Strong agreement all around Ella.
> 
> And Russell, if you're still around, address the rumors that you've encouraged your ex's to gain severe amounts of weight. I do believe his second wife passed away at a fairly young age.



And I hear he punches kittens, too.

Just leave it alone. This thread is enough of a trainwreck as it is, no need to add his 2nd wife's death to the debris. That's just poor taste, a bit like his posts.

He wrote a dumb and mystifying OP, you all got sufficiently angry with him, and now it's time to realize that Russel's influence on your lives is marginal at best.


----------



## exile in thighville (Jul 24, 2009)

mossystate said:


> Russell, could it be that YOU are the one who is dangling this carrot? Does this give you some damned cheap thrill, thinking about how you, in large part, have this womans medical health in your hands?
> 
> 
> SICK.
> ...



dude what the fuck get your own medical benefits i don't even love you anymore


----------



## exile in thighville (Jul 24, 2009)

*benifitsitititits


----------



## thatgirl08 (Jul 24, 2009)

this thread needs more chair jokes.


----------



## Weeze (Jul 24, 2009)

thatgirl08 said:


> this thread needs more chair jokes.



I TRIED DAMMIT


----------



## Laura2008 (Jul 25, 2009)




----------



## JerseyGirl07093 (Jul 25, 2009)

thatgirl08 said:


> this thread needs more chair jokes.



And more cowbell.


----------



## jdramzer (Jul 25, 2009)

Russell Williams said:


> My partner and I
> 
> My partner and I have known each other since about 1982. The laws of the state of Maryland do not allow us to be married. A week from today we will have a commitment ceremony. The commitment ceremony will be in a local park. After the commitment ceremony we will go to a local Methodist Church for a commitment ceremony party. From there we will go to the NAAFA convention for our (if a couple that gets married has a honeymoon what does a couple that becomes committed have -- a corn syrup moon?). If circumstances change at some later time my partner and I may become married.
> 
> Russell Williams



Russell has left so much out of his post and most certainly maligned one of the dearest persons I know. While his wife...yes that is right, his WIFE...was in Arizona taking care of a mother who was dying a brutal death, Russell, without warning sent her divorce papers via certified mail. When she left for AZ, she left all her belongings behind because she had no idea she would never be able to return to her home. After her mother's death from ovarian cancer Russell's wife was rendered homeless since Russell had changed the locks and refused to allow her to ever come back home. 

Russell and his wife have only been to court one time. The court found that Russell had no... that is NO...grounds for divorce. The things he accused her of were vile and baseless. And, be assured, he will make terrible accusations against her after he reads this post. Remember, it is Russell (the manipulator) making these accusations. Do not believe him...he twists everything. 

His wife has been ill for this entire year. She had an infection, picked up during or after surgery resulted in an epidural abscess, that has left her with neurological impairment on the left side. She has been hospitalized for a great deal of time this year and has had to use most of her energy just to learn to walk again. Russell served her divorce papers a second time while she was lying in a hospital bed, hardly able to function on her own. He maligned Newt Gingerich for doing a similar thing when Gingerich's wife was hospitalized with cancer...how ironic.

Russell will get his divorce. Maryland law allows for that. However, the financial agreement needs to be hammered out. That is the only hold up. If Russell would agree to the terms sent him by her attorney it could all be said and done. I wonder, however, how committed Russell could truly be. After all, he is now seeking divorce from his THIRD wife (and although his two previous wives are now deceased, he did divorce them both while they were still alive). 

BTW, Russell had an affair with Louise Wolfe during his second marriageone wonders why they didnt have a commitment ceremony then.


----------



## LoveBHMS (Jul 25, 2009)

jdramzer said:


> Russell has left so much out of his post and most certainly maligned one of the dearest persons I know. While his wife...yes that is right, his WIFE...was in Arizona taking care of a mother who was dying a brutal death, Russell, without warning sent her divorce papers via certified mail. When she left for AZ, she left all her belongings behind because she had no idea she would never be able to return to her home. After her mother's death from ovarian cancer Russell's wife was rendered homeless since Russell had changed the locks and refused to allow her to ever come back home.
> 
> Russell and his wife have only been to court one time. The court found that Russell had no... that is NO...grounds for divorce. The things he accused her of were vile and baseless. And, be assured, he will make terrible accusations against her after he reads this post. *Remember, it is Russell (the manipulator) making these accusations. Do not believe him...he twists everything. *
> His wife has been ill for this entire year. She had an infection, picked up during or after surgery resulted in an epidural abscess, that has left her with neurological impairment on the left side. She has been hospitalized for a great deal of time this year and has had to use most of her energy just to learn to walk again. Russell served her divorce papers a second time while she was lying in a hospital bed, hardly able to function on her own. He maligned Newt Gingerich for doing a similar thing when Gingerich's wife was hospitalized with cancer...how ironic.
> ...



We know all about how he twists things. This very thread is proof. Candidly, without even knowing you I believe your post.


----------



## tonynyc (Jul 25, 2009)

*If Ron Simmons were to read this train wreck there is Only "1" Word that can sum up this thread *

*DAMN*


----------



## indy500tchr (Jul 25, 2009)

jdramzer said:


> Russell has left so much out of his post and most certainly maligned one of the dearest persons I know. While his wife...yes that is right, his WIFE...was in Arizona taking care of a mother who was dying a brutal death, Russell, without warning sent her divorce papers via certified mail. When she left for AZ, she left all her belongings behind because she had no idea she would never be able to return to her home. After her mother's death from ovarian cancer Russell's wife was rendered homeless since Russell had changed the locks and refused to allow her to ever come back home.
> 
> Russell and his wife have only been to court one time. The court found that Russell had no... that is NO...grounds for divorce. The things he accused her of were vile and baseless. And, be assured, he will make terrible accusations against her after he reads this post. Remember, it is Russell (the manipulator) making these accusations. Do not believe him...he twists everything.
> 
> ...



So I am assuming you know Russell and his wife personally? I saw you posted on the DIMS Bash thread that you couldn't wait to see them there. Did you happen to go?


----------



## tonynyc (Jul 25, 2009)

indy500tchr said:


> So I am assuming you know Russell and his wife personally? I saw you posted on the DIMS Bash thread that you couldn't wait to see them there. Did you happen to go?



*Oh -Shit Double Busted!!!!  This thread has more twist than a Mystery Novel *


----------



## jdramzer (Jul 25, 2009)

indy500tchr said:


> So I am assuming you know Russell and his wife personally? I saw you posted on the DIMS Bash thread that you couldn't wait to see them there. Did you happen to go?



Yes, I know them both well. I didn't go--I was just bursting to say something to him and it came out in that post. When I saw this last thread I had to set the record straight.


----------



## Surlysomething (Jul 25, 2009)

I love a good burn. :bow:


----------



## SparklingBBW (Jul 25, 2009)

Bitching about not being served "seconds" when others' plates are empty is, at minimum, egregiously selfish (to say the least). 

You always seem to want to school us Russell, well here's some schooling for you: 

Heterosexual privilage checklist: 

From: 

http://thepaintedturtle.blogspot.com/2005/03/heterosexual-privilege-checklist.html



On a daily basis as a straight person…



I can be pretty sure that my roomate, hallmates and classmates will be comfortable with my sexual orientation.

If I pick up a magazine, watch TV, or play music, I can be certain my sexual orientation will be represented.

When I talk about my heterosexuality (such as in a joke or talking about my relationships), I will not be accused of pushing my sexual orientation onto others.

I do not have to fear that if my family or friends find out about my sexual orientation there will be economic, emotional, physical or psychological consequences.

I did not grow up with games that attack my sexual orientation (IE fag tag or smear the queer).

I am not accused of being abused, warped or psychologically confused because of my sexual orientation.

I can go home from most meetings, classes, and conversations without feeling excluded, fearful, attacked, isolated, outnumbered, unheard, held at a distance, stereotyped or feared because of my sexual orientation.

I am never asked to speak for everyone who is heterosexual.

I can be sure that my classes will require curricular materials that testify to the existence of people with my sexual orientation.

People don't ask why I made my choice of sexual orientation.

People don't ask why I made my choice to be public about my sexual orientation.

I do not have to fear revealing my sexual orientation to friends or family. It's assumed.

My sexual orientation was never associated with a closet.

People of my gender do not try to convince me to change my sexual orientation.

I don't have to defend my heterosexuality.

I can easily find a religious community that will not exclude me for being heterosexual.

I can count on finding a therapist or doctor willing and able to talk about my sexuality.

I am guaranteed to find sex education literature for couples with my sexual orientation.

Because of my sexual orientation, I do not need to worry that people will harass me.

I have no need to qualify my straight identity.

My masculinity/femininity is not challenged because of my sexual orientation.

I am not identified by my sexual orientation.

I can be sure that if I need legal or medical help my sexual orientation will not work against me.

If my day, week, or year is going badly, I need not ask of each negative episode or situation whether it has sexual orientation overtones.

Whether I rent or I go to a theater, Blockbuster, an EFS or TOFS movie, I can be sure I will not have trouble finding my sexual orientation represented.

I am guaranteed to find people of my sexual orientation represented in my workplace.

I can walk in public with my significant other and not have people double-take or stare.

I can choose to not think politically about my sexual orientation.

I do not have to worry about telling my roommate about my sexuality. It is assumed I am a heterosexual.

I can remain oblivious of the language and culture of LGBTQ folk without feeling in my culture any penalty for such oblivion.

I can go for months without being called straight.

I'm not grouped because of my sexual orientation.

My individual behavior does not reflect on people who identity as heterosexual.

In everyday conversation, the language my friends and I use generally assumes my sexual orientation. For example, sex inappropriately referring to only heterosexual sex or family meaning heterosexual relationships with kids.

People do not assume I am experienced in sex (or that I even have it!) merely because of my sexual orientation.

I can kiss a person of the opposite gender on the heart or in the cafeteria without being watched and stared at.

Nobody calls me straight with maliciousness.

People can use terms that describe my sexual orientation and mean positive things (IE "straight as an arrow", "standing up straight" or "straightened out" ) instead of demeaning terms (IE "ewww, that's gay" or being "queer" ) .

I am not asked to think about why I am straight.

I can be open about my sexual orientation without worrying about my job. 

.
FFS


----------



## Weeze (Jul 25, 2009)

Not that it's not deserved, but isn't this thread personally attacking Russell Williams?


----------



## Imp (Jul 25, 2009)

mergirl said:


> Totally?! Its Article 12 of the European Human rights act- The right to marry.
> Whats the deal with America?



Because America, some of it still, understands that rights don't come from government. Something is not a right just because the EU makes it so.


----------



## indy500tchr (Jul 25, 2009)

jdramzer said:


> Yes, I know them both well. I didn't go--I was just bursting to say something to him and it came out in that post. When I saw this last thread I had to set the record straight.



I was able to meet Russell at the DIMS bash. When I did have my conversation with him he did tell me that his friend Louise was going to have a commitment ceremony later in the year. 

I asked him if she was a lesbian and he said no so then of course I asked him why she just couldn't get married to him. He then proceeded to tell me that the "man" she was committing to was already married. At no point did he say that HE was the man that was still married. I was quite surprised to find this out in this post.

Thank you for shedding more light on this really effed up situation.


----------



## TraciJo67 (Jul 25, 2009)

krismiss said:


> Not that it's not deserved, but isn't this thread personally attacking Russell Williams?



I think so too, kris ... but I don't feel any sympathy at all. Russell drove this train right off the rails himself.


----------



## Weeze (Jul 25, 2009)

TraciJo67 said:


> I think so too, kris ... but I don't feel any sympathy at all. Russell drove this train right off the rails himself.



Oh, I agree. 
To be honest, i'm interested to hear more about this magical shit storm.

p.s. traci you never told me if I guessed correctly on the pop quiz. I'm waiting, woman.


----------



## fffff (Jul 25, 2009)

jdramzer said:


> Russell has left so much out of his post and most certainly maligned one of the dearest persons I know. While his wife...yes that is right, his WIFE...was in Arizona taking care of a mother who was dying a brutal death, Russell, without warning sent her divorce papers via certified mail. When she left for AZ, she left all her belongings behind because she had no idea she would never be able to return to her home. After her mother's death from ovarian cancer Russell's wife was rendered homeless since Russell had changed the locks and refused to allow her to ever come back home.
> 
> Russell and his wife have only been to court one time. The court found that Russell had no... that is NO...grounds for divorce. The things he accused her of were vile and baseless. And, be assured, he will make terrible accusations against her after he reads this post. Remember, it is Russell (the manipulator) making these accusations. Do not believe him...he twists everything.
> 
> ...



I have yet to be disappointed by a Russell Williams thread.


----------



## indy500tchr (Jul 25, 2009)

kris the answer to your question is YES that was him.


----------



## mossystate (Jul 25, 2009)

krismiss said:


> p.s. traci you never told me if I guessed correctly on the pop quiz. I'm waiting, woman.



Did ya get it right..huh..did ya?


----------



## katorade (Jul 25, 2009)

TraciJo67 said:


> I think so too, kris ... but I don't feel any sympathy at all. Russell drove this train right off the rails himself.



toot toot.

I'm too used to reading "Manipulations by Russell Williams", so what I'm really bothered by here is the fact that I've had fewer dates than Russell has had marriages. Idiocracy is coming, everyone.


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Jul 25, 2009)

*subscribes*


----------



## frankman (Jul 26, 2009)

Imp said:


> Because America, some of it still, understands that rights don't come from government. Something is not a right just because the EU makes it so.



But really, most of the time it is though.

Anyway, there's nothing in your constitution that prevents same sex marriages. Sadly, this is one of those issues where the American people have chosen not to allow it. In the end, majority vote counts. Even really really dumb ones.


----------



## TallFatSue (Jul 26, 2009)

Sad to say, I know someone like this. As we say to my distant (but not distant enough) cousin Bill, "Gee, if it's your third nasty divorce, maybe the problem is YOU." 

Distant cousin Bill has made an impressive trainwreck of his life, and it's everybody's fault but his own. His so-called commitments to any of his wives lasted only as long as it was convenient for him. He is absolutely oblivious that he torpedoed his own marriages, mostly due to his adultery and his just plain being a horse's ass to his wives. The last time we saw Bill, he had returned from a business trip to China and said he felt a "geniune connection" with his interpreter, and showed us photos of her. Obviously all women in the United States have placed him on their "Do Not Marry" list. 

When Art & I were married, at our wedding reception Bill congratulated my husband on the whale he had just landed. Thanks, Bill. Meanwhile we've been happily married for 27 years. Thank goodness we did it right the first (and only) time. 

PS. My husband asked Bill where he was living at the time. Bill said he was just outside Columbus. Art, who is almost as much of a wise ass as I am, responded, "Why? Won't they let you in?"


----------



## Elfcat (Jul 26, 2009)

Russell Williams said:


> I also hope that things will fall into place and the the lovely and wonderful Louise Wolfe will eventually consent to honor me with marrying me.
> 
> I do not know why it is taking so long to get the divorce. One possibility, and only a possibility, is that because my wife has very serious medical problems and I have very good medical insurance she is not in a hurry to lose the medical benefits that come with being married to me, but really I do not know why she is not anxious to be divorced.



I think a number of people have already retorted "Well, DUH!" I would think there would be some alimony involved in a case like this, at least I think you'll be in for a Medigap policy for... is it Dalene? Hard for me to remember everything that has transpired over the years, but when you put yourself out as an activist it's a little difficult to avoid being put to a higher standard than some of the miscreants who make no such claims.


----------



## bigsexy920 (Jul 26, 2009)

This is such a WTF thread - Really, WTF !


----------



## BBWTexan (Jul 26, 2009)

krismiss said:


> Oh, I agree.
> To be honest, i'm interested to hear more about this magical shit storm.





fffff said:


> I have yet to be disappointed by a Russell Williams thread.



Yep. Yep. Yep.


----------



## TraciJo67 (Jul 26, 2009)

Methinx we need more Russell Williams in this Russell Williams thread, tho ...


----------



## fatgirlflyin (Jul 26, 2009)

Elfcat said:


> I think a number of people have already retorted "Well, DUH!" I would think there would be some alimony involved in a case like this, at least I think you'll be in for a Medigap policy for... is it Dalene? Hard for me to remember everything that has transpired over the years, but when you put yourself out as an activist it's a little difficult to avoid being put to a higher standard than some of the miscreants who make no such claims.




I dont think that people's irritation has anything to do with his "activism" (and I use the word loosely), but more the fact that he comes in all preachy, and tries to imply that he's in a same sex relationship which is why they can't get married. 

Instead he should have been saying I'm married, and I'm cheating on my wife and that's why I can't get married. 

Its kinda funny, you'd think someone who hurls stones from his glass house would have made sure his glass was unbreakable first...


----------



## crayola box (Jul 26, 2009)

fatgirlflyin said:


> I dont think that people's irritation has anything to do with his "activism" (and I use the word loosely), but more the fact that he comes in all preachy, and tries to imply that he's in a same sex relationship which is why they can't get married.
> 
> Instead he should have been saying I'm married, and I'm cheating on my wife and that's why I can't get married.
> 
> Its kinda funny, you'd think someone who hurls stones from his glass house would have made sure his glass was unbreakable first...



You know in his own strange way I think his glass is unbreakable, not in the traditional sense of the phrase, but rather in that the criticism/advice he receives each time he posts whether it be about "activism", or this, does not seem to have any effect on him. I haven't met him in person but from where I sit it appears he is either oblivious or does not care. I know as someone with so few posts I should probably hold my tongue, but having read the boards for years its not hard to see the pattern.

Not to discriminate against men who have been divorced 3+ times, but I can't help but wonder about the women who get into a relationship with him. I can only assume that they are not members of Dimensions and/or do not know his history with women maybe? Or perhaps he just comes off differently in person than online... idk, anyway rambling over.


----------



## fatgirlflyin (Jul 26, 2009)

crayola box said:


> You know in his own strange way I think his glass is unbreakable, not in the traditional sense of the phrase, but rather in that the criticism/advice he receives each time he posts whether it be about "activism", or this, does not seem to have any effect on him.



That's a really good point! 



crayola box said:


> Not to discriminate against men who have been divorced 3+ times, but I can't help but wonder about the women who get into a relationship with him. I can only assume that they are not members of Dimensions and/or do not know his history with women maybe? Or perhaps he just comes off differently in person than online... idk, anyway rambling over.



I think its that most of us (women) have that, "he loves me so he won't be that way with me" idea floating arond in our heads. I know I've certainly been guilty of it. People just don't change all that much. If there is a history of a certain behavior, you can pretty much bet that its going to continure.


----------



## ThikJerseyChik (Jul 26, 2009)

FGF said: "I think its that most of us (women) have that, "he loves me so he won't be that way with me" idea floating around in our heads. I know I've certainly been guilty of it. People just don't change all that much. If there is a history of a certain behavior, you can pretty much bet that its going to continue."

I too am guilty of this silliness in my past relationships...I had to actively STOP myself from thinking like that. Self preservation is the key, ladies.


----------



## jdramzer (Jul 26, 2009)

crayola box said:


> You know in his own strange way I think his glass is unbreakable, not in the traditional sense of the phrase, but rather in that the criticism/advice he receives each time he posts whether it be about "activism", or this, does not seem to have any effect on him. *I haven't met him in person but from where I sit it appears he is either oblivious or does not care. *I know as someone with so few posts I should probably hold my tongue, but having read the boards for years its not hard to see the pattern.
> 
> Not to discriminate against men who have been divorced 3+ times, but I can't help but wonder about the women who get into a relationship with him. I can only assume that they are not members of Dimensions and/or do not know his history with women maybe? Or perhaps he just comes off differently in person than online... idk, anyway rambling over.



He loves attention--good OR bad.


----------



## thatgirl08 (Jul 26, 2009)

Maybe a committment ceremony is good thing for you Russell, that way when you decide to get rid of this broad you won't have to bother with all that icky divorce stuff.


----------



## LoveBHMS (Jul 27, 2009)

thatgirl08 said:


> Maybe a committment ceremony is good thing for you Russell, that way when you decide to get rid of this broad you won't have to bother with all that icky divorce stuff.



True, but remember Louise spells well. You don't just let a woman like that get away.


----------



## Risible (Jul 27, 2009)

This thread has served its purpose - Russell discussed his dilemma, you-all commented; there's really nothing more to say.

Thread closed.


----------

