Once again, Amy was dead on!!! Kick that guy to the curb. Honestly, you'd be doing him a favor. He's 38 - not 8. Time he stood on his own two feet and acted like the man the calendar says he is.

"He finds you especially beautiful as you're writing the check to pay his electric bill."

The absolute crux of the matter. The LW doesn't have a boyfriend; she has an overgrown child, and a spoiled, impulsive one at that. I'll be honest, I just do not get guys who reach this age and still don't seem to be capable of supporting themselves. Yes, the CS is a burden, but paying rent on an apartment that's unusable is, as they say in tennis, an unforced error.

Maybe he's got self-worth problems of his own. (And maybe that's what attracted them to each other.) But the LW isn't getting paid to be his therapist. LW, you can't let a sinking ship drag you down with it. Get to the lifeboats before it's too late.

Is it an apartment he rents or an apartment he owns and is making mortgage payments on?

Good lord. The guy is a mooch, he's using her until she has nothing left, then he'll move on to the next woman who desperately needs compliments and is willing to pay for them. Kick him in the head as he's falling out your front door.

There are so many women that have boyfriends like this guy. I think that they are getting something out of the arrangement. They want a man they can control, and will pay to have that power. They're like little girls that want to play house and have no idea what to do with an actual adult male-they're so wild and unpredictable and horny! Much safer to be with a loser parasite.

I went through that phase and being burned financially by a dud like this one smartened me up pretty fast. The LW has to set some standards, if she has the self-confidence to do so, and if she can handle being with an adult with his own opinions.

Oh, thanks Amy for the two columns this week -- twice the fun!!

People who fail to live within their means rarely change, whether they're male or female. By "helping him financially whenever he needs it," she's enabling him. Let's say he actually does get rid of his apartment... is he really going to pay her at least $400 a month in rent/expenses/whatever? Doubtful. He probably WILL end up getting a new IPod, a laptop, a nicer car, or a healthclub membership. Or, he'll pay for his luxury expenses (HD cable with DVR, perhaps), and act like he's contributing, even though he's the one who made the monthly bills increase. (I had a friend who was briefly married to a guy like that... he moved into the house she already owned, and never even came close to paying his share of the bills. He's pay HIS cell phone bill, and the cable bill. Never any of "their" expenses. When he'd get a bonus, he'd go buy himself something nice.)

That's exactly what my ex was like. I was supporting both of us and the minute he earned any money, he would buy himself something nice. I guess he thought I was his mommy and that he was the little prince.

My ex is just like this guy. That's WHY he's my EX! Only his parents sold his condo, and made him move back home, the better to keep him under their thumb. And to keep enabling him. Let him go, LW, let him go. The sooner the better.

Chrissy, you crack me up! And you had a good point about the relationship-control thing. I've observed that a woman with low self-esteem will often seek a relationship that she can be in control of, because in her own mind, a man that she can't control *will* eventually find her inadequate and walk out. And it's kind of a self-fulfilling prophecy, because a woman with low self-worth makes herself inadequate, in any number of ways. (Feel free to switch the genders and see if the statement holds the other way -- IMO the dynamic isn't quite the same, but there are similarities.)

It seems to me that a lot of women who are serial abusees fall into this category. Being willing to tolerate abuse puts them, socially and legally, in the power position in the relationship.

"I just do not get guys who reach this age and still don't seem to be capable of supporting themselves."

Me neither. I know a guy who is 39 years old, cute and funny, reads a lot, is fun to be around, but still lives in his parents' basement and barely ever works. I wanted to move out of my parents' house from about the age of 14.

As far as Amy's LW goes, does it make anyone else want to reach for a baseball bat to learn that the loser boyfriend has already reproduced?

"A guy might tell you he has no problem being supported by you, but he's sure to devalue you for it..."

That's pretty interesting. In those situations I've seen, it always seemed that the woman becomes resentful and the guy's self-esteem drops, but I'd never drawn the next conclusion -- that he devalues her for accepting the situation. That makes sense.

Here is what is really going on here, as I have been in the same boat as this guy. First of all, don't judge the guy until you have been broke from child support payments, paying the ex's attorney fees, and paying your own legal fees. It is easy to throw rocks at men when they have to live in a wretched lifestyle like this. But, step into his shoes and see how well you could do.

Comments like these piss me off because you don't know what it is like until suddenly you are broke from trying to fight the court system, paying CS, and basically living on nothing.

I went through the same thing as this guy...devasted financially and trying to fight a system knowing I would lose anyway. I had to move out of my house into a tiny little apartment and cut all my spending while paying $700.00 a month for CS, and half of a private school of about $800.00/month. Any of you had to do that?

On top of that I had all of the maxed credit cards to pay, my attorney fees, her attorney fees...all so i could have the privilege of seeing my son every other weekend.

Girlfriend? How on earth could I afford a girlfriend? Fortunately, a nice, quiet, stable woman and I hit it off really well, I moved in with her, got back on my feet finally, and ended up marrying her. I did not have diddly squat--she paid for everything. But now she stays home while I work and does what she wants....how is that for payback? Oh yeah, I kept fighting the fight with my ex, and only had to wait until she messed up. Now I have custody of my son too!!

How about some compassion for the guy who seems like he is floundering in a sea of debt (and probably guild, shame, regret, and sadness). At least until you know the whole story, which it would seem is missing.

Mike, note this: I'm feeling resentful because he's very irresponsible in his spending (he lacks self-control)

Always easier to spend other people's money.

Note that you took steps to manage your situation. He just dips into her money. This is not a situation for compassion, but a situation for action.

Well, allow me to jump in with a my-ex-the-moocher story.

Same situation, basically, just not cohabiting officially and without any kids or divorce in the picture.

Ex had the money to spend on alcohol, concerts, bad tattoos, etc., just not enough to spend on minor considerations like paying rent on time or the electric bill. I ended up 'loaning' just under $1000 (not counting all the times I shelled out for dinners, movies, etc, because he didn't mind paying for booze when out with his friends, but thought that I should be okay with paying for most of the stuff we did as a couple) to keep his lights on and him in the apartment.

When I asked him to start paying me back, he would dawdle and claim to be broke (all the while spending about 45% of his take home pay on bar tabs). Then, he tried to convince me that I had given him the money, not lent it, and so he wasn't obligated to pay it back.

After he realized that I was ready to kick his ass to the curb, he started using the money as a tactic to get me to stay-when I told him I was leaving him, he would threaten not to pay me back. At the time, $1000 seemed like a lot of money to me.

After going back and forth for a while, I realized that $1000 was actually a cheap price to get him out of my life and dumped his worthless ass.

I'm actually really glad it happened. I've seen my friends go through similar situations with guys. Now it's a huge warning sign. I will never again date someone who is happy to be a parasite and doesn't seem to see the shame in being a leech.

There's a huge difference between being caught in a hard financial situation because of circumstances and needing to accept help versus being a disgusting freeloader. And this guy's combined CS and rent is under $1000. That should be manageable, even with a relatively small salary, if you're willing to make sacrifices and be responsible. And this guy clearly isn't. It's not about a temporary situation, it's about a flaw in his personality that lets him behave so unethically.

If gutless dumps him, he'll find someone else to mooch off of. She can either settle for being angry, resentful (and broke), and wait for when the guy starts sneering at her for being willing to be stepped all over. At that point, she'll probably put off dumping him because of the sunk cost fallacy-if I break up with him, I won't recoup my losses. But she won't anyway. That's just the nature of the beast.

Cut and run. And don't think that he'll end up on the street holding a sign if you stop supporting him-he'll just find some other chick who will trade a few "you're lovelies" for three quarters of her monthly take-home.

Choika,

I admit that a moocher is really a jerk and should be dumped. However, LW only presents us ONE side of the story. What are the facts here? What kind of job does he have? Does he have any other divorce related bills?If there are no facts this whole argument is pure conjecture.

Also, I was wondering what planet you were from. On my planet $1000 is alot of money no matter how much you are making. Manageable? Child support, Rent, food, gas, car payment (if he has a car), clothes, attorney fees...the list goes on...

I have an idea...lets take away your child support money and THEN see if its just a drop in the 'ole bucket. Or, if you don't have kids from your divorce, ask one of your friends how much $1000 is...

Better yet! Let's take away the boyfriend's ex's CS money and see if $500 is "manageable".

Wherever the LW lives, I want to move there. If a 38-year-old guy loaded down with debt and poor impulse control can score with a 27-year-old, that's my kind of town.

"Also, because women evolved to seek providers, men co-evolved to become somebody and acquire resources, probably as a way of getting chicks. A guy might tell you he has no problem being supported by you, but he's sure to devalue you for it -- his genes make him do it."

Really? Where do you have the evidence to support that one?

I suggest "Tapped Out" be prepared for a difficult time evicting the guy. Evidently she doesn't have a strong personality; maybe she has a male relative or male friend who's a little bit menacing, so the message gets through to this guy clearly that he needs to hit the road for good.

I paid child support for over 16 years and can emphatize with those who have difficulties in that regard. But it's his problem, not hers.

After eight months, he may be a lawful tenant (depending upon the rules and elapsed time required in her state). She may have to give him a lawful termination of lease (including 30-60 days notice).

Or he could use the courts and claim she beat him and get free rent for a few months while she's out on her arse.

LW should kick him out and stop wasting time. Moochers are far from male only phenomenon and sadly far too many exist today. Also, IMHO 1000 bucks is cheap to get rid of someone compared to alternatives that exist today.

Ok, I'll ask it: how unattractive is this woman?

When the shoe is on the other foot what would the women here say?

My girlfriend of eight months is 27, with two kids. I'm 38 and divorced. She has unofficially moved into my apartment, but she isn't pulling her weight. She pays $500 a month in child support and $400 for her apartment -- that she doesn't live in. (All of her utilities were shut off for nonpayment.) I understand that she doesn't have money to throw around, and help her financially whenever she needs it. She's always grateful, but I'm feeling resentful because she's very irresponsible in her spending (she lacks self-control). I could've amassed an emergency fund or bought the motorcycle I promised myself after my divorce. Now, that's been put off. She threw me a few bucks for expenses when I asked, but only twice. I told her she has until August 1 to ditch her apartment so she'll have some money. She does say she loves me every day, tells me I'm handsome, and says I make her happier than she's ever been. I'm at a loss. How do I kindly tell her to pull it together?
--Tapped Out

For those interested in such things, science writer/sr editor Sharon Begley has an interesting article in June 29 Newsweek, titled Don't Blame the Caveman. Ms. Begley, formerly of the WSJ's Science Journal, does a good job parsing the stunning lack of actual science behind many common evo psych claims, such as that stepfathers are programmed to treat their stepkids poorly; women don't "go for" physical beauty in men, but rather $/status; all men everywhere prefer hourglass-figured women, etc etc. Some of these may be true, or true at some times and places, but that is different than saying it's genetics or evolution that makes it so. As a biologist, I really hope people educate themselves, and Begley is good at breaking down difficult scientific concepts: or, in this instance, pointing out what's not even science, in the first instance.

Jay-the same damn thing. Why would you think it would be any different if their genders were switched?

Mike-
Clearly we don't have all the facts, because LW wrote in and her guy didn't, right? It's entirely possible that LW is leaving out all sorts of important information and trying to present him in as bad a light as possible. But we don't know that, and unless he intends to write in defending himself and Amy published it, we won't.

I do like how you assume that I'm divorced, though. Cute. Fortunately untrue, though (I try to avoid making promises to people unless I'm going to fulfill them).

The situation you were in clearly sucked. But you took steps to get out of it, right? Rented the shitty apartment? Lived like a starving guy? Accepted the help you were offered but only when you needed it? Paid the person back in kind who gave it to you?

That doesn't sound like LW's boyfriend to me. And clearly she isn't comfortable with the fact that she's financially supporting him, otherwise she wouldn't have written in asking for advice. You girlfriend didn't have to tell you to 'pull it together,' you were already doing it.

$1000 is a lot of money, sure-after all, I stayed in a horrible relationship for too long because I thought $1000 was a lot of money. But that's relative too. $1000 ended up being a cheap price to pay to leave.

But LW's boyfriend doesn't seem to think $1000 is a lot of money. He's not spending like he thinks $1000 is a lot of money, he's spending like he's got discretionary income. And he really doesn't. But that doesn't matter, because he's not going to starve or go homeless with LW writing the checks.

And if she expects him to have some money after he doesn't have to pay rent on his apartment, that's not going to happen. He'll just have $400 more to piss away.

Ultimately it's her decision to keep him around, which means accepting that she'll be footing the tab and feeling increasingly resentful about it, or decide that she'd rather have a guy who shares her views about financial responsibility, no matter how broke he may be. Or, she could accept that being in a relationship with him means a hefty price tag, and make her peace with it. But giving in to someone and then resenting them for it is a poor idea.

"...women evolved to seek providers, men co-evolved to become somebody and acquire resources, probably as a way of getting chicks. A guy might tell you he has no problem being supported by you, but he's sure to devalue you for it -- his genes make him do it. (Sadly, they have yet to enroll in 'Intro to Women's Studies.')"

It angers me that politically correct feminists are all about challenging traditional gender roles except when doing so forces them to relinquish female privilege.

I'm not defending this man's irresponsible behavior, but why is inherently wrong for a woman to be the breadwinner and a man to be the homemaker if both pursue their roles responsibly? Are traditional gender roles socially constructed, and therefore worthy of deconstruction, only when deconstruction of these roles doesn't benefit men as well as women?

Why is it inherently wrong for a woman to be the breadwinner and a man to be the homemaker if both pursue their roles responsibly? Are traditional gender roles socially constructed, and therefore worthy of deconstruction, only when deconstruction of these roles doesn't benefit men as well as women?

Brendan, the guy isn't the homemaker, just a big old mooch. Glenn Sacks was a stay-at-home dad when his kids were small-- and a wonderful one, it seems. His wife was the breadwinner. He didn't just suck up the money and lie on the couch. He actually cared for the children, their children. This woman doesn't have a child -- he has children. She earns a living. He mooches it up.

Brendan-

What?

Where did you get the idea that this guy was the 'homemaker' and she was the 'breadwinner?'

They don't have any sort of arrangement-LW's language makes it seem like she was sort of surprised that he showed up and then didn't leave (hence, the 'unofficial' moving in), he's just camping out there while she foots the bills. She doesn't mention that he contributes to their situation in any way, even unfinancially, like helping with domestic chores.

Personally, I would be just thrilled to be the breadwinner, as I don't like doing domestic things and am a pretty neglectful housekeeper, and I certainly would not think less of any guy who would prefer to run the household rather than make the bucks. That would probably be an ideal situation for me, as anyone expecting me to be more than a marginal housekeeper will be disappointed.

I'm confused as to where you got the idea that the commenters think it's 'inherently wrong' for a dude to be the more on the domestic side of things, and if you think Amy's a politically correct feminist, you ain't from around here.

This guy doesn't seem to be helping out in any significant way. My SO was broke when I met him, so even though we didn't go to expensive restaurants and he didn't buy me big gifts (we still don't-we're both allergic to spending money), he would take the time to make me a nice dinner after I came home from work and leave a bouquet of flowers in my car that he'd picked from the park.

If we do end up living together, I have no doubt that he'll do the bulk of the domestic stuff. He's better at it than I am and likes doing it, where I see it as a chore and am one of those people who really just doesn't see the mess. But in return, I'm more than happy to pay for groceries or do some other thing that makes the arrangement equitable. I'd be miserable as a housekeeper, but I don't devalue those who want to do it, no matter their genital configuration.

He truly is a wonderful person, and I'm so lucky to be with him. I really think my relationship with him makes me try to be a better person.

From what I've read of your blogs and columns, you and Gregg seem to have a great relationship. I find it interesting that many of the readers seem to be so resistant to learning about what it is that has made your relationship successful.

I think the responses to this column by the readers have been very revealing, particularly about divorce.

Many of my friends got married relatively young, by 25, and had children. Now as we're all floundering further into our thirties, several of them have gotten or are getting divorced.

I never married. Never really wanted to, and didn't have anyone that I wanted to spend the rest of my life with. Neither did a lot of my friends, but it didn't stop them from getting hitched, because they felt left out.

I'd like to think I've been a good friend to the people I know who have separated-tried to provide moral support, helped with legal resources, babysat, let them stay at my house during separations.

But what has really amazed me is not the level of sadness, although there is that too, by the incredible amount of rage and anger they have. And many of these were the ones who had initiated the separation! A lot of my friends seem particularly bitter at the people they know who either never married, or married and aren't separating. They're angry at the whole system, and they aren't getting past it.

Frankly it reminds me of the people who post here claiming that all men are losers, or all women are bitter harpies who are intent on getting all of your money before they dump you. It's weird. I can understand being angry at the person you feel betrayed you, but this goes way beyond that.

I'm a little lost. I've stayed friends with the people I know, but it gets harder when they redraw the lines after a split, and I resent getting sucked into their problems. Now, I've started avoiding those friends, because they're so angry all the time, and they seem to resent me for not having been through what they have. They don't seem able to move beyond it.

Choika, all I can tell you is that it takes time. Time for those people to move beyond what they see as getting a raw deal. I don't know how long it'll take, it varies from person to person. If you have to avoid certain people because of their resentment, think of it as self-preservation. That's what I've had to do. Eventually, they'll come around. You may even get an apology or two. I did.

Oh and to address the other, "reverse-gender" issue: When my BF and his wife were going through their divorce, he told her he was living at his sister's. He was living with me though. He was still paying the mortgage on their house, so he couldn't help me financially as much as he wanted to, but he did contribute. When his daughter started school, he took out a loan and paid for her first year of school, with the understanding that her mother would contribute towards the rest when she got the proceeds from selling their house. She reneged. She also claimed her on her tax return, meaning that he couldn't. However, since the divorce and his release of being financially obligated to her, he has been more than contributing to our household. In addition to paying the mortgage (I take care of utilities, groceries and other household expenses), he also does all of the yardwork, and keeps an awesome garden. I am truly very lucky. My ex, on the other hand, resents having to pay half of the co-pays for our daughters' doctor visits, which he hasn't done in 9 years. I just took him back to court for it. He has until October 19 to pay up, or go to jail. Based on past experience wtih him, I'm expecting he'll give me a check probably the day before we have to go back to court. The differences between him and my BF are like night and day.

Flynne-

It sounds like your BF is truly an honorable person and got a really raw deal in his divorce.

I think the issue here is not so much whether someone can contribute, but whether or not they are willing to. If someone truly wants to contribute, they will find a way to do it, even if it's not monetarily.

I do understand about my divorced/divorcing friends needing time to get past what's happening. But I wonder at what part it goes from being understandable anger at what has happened to actual bitterness that affects every aspect of your life.

Well, to put it bluntly, from when they go from being my friend to being like the people who leave comments on here spewing hate at every woman or every man.

What really makes me said is watching friends, who I thought of as good and decent people, turn their children into weapons to try to get back at their spouse, or deliberately deprive their children of things they need because they are angry.

But it's hard, because I haven't married and I can't have children, so I don't really have a way to know whether I am just being judgmental, or if they're really doing things that are wrong, and if so, at what point do I decide it's unethical for me to remain friends with them?

It's always possible that I'll revisit the subject in the future, maybe from the other side, and then I'm sure my perspective will be different.

Choika, have you ever heard the expression, "Bitterness is like drinking poison and waiting for the other person to die"?

Pirate Jo-

I haven't, but I think it's very apt.

I think all your friends are angry because they totally believed all the romantic crap they see on TV and in movies. They get into a relationship and then they sit back and wait for it to magically stay interesting and fun and exciting. Of course it doesn't, so then they are furious that their partner deliberately didn't do his/her job. It's very childish and narcissictic, as they feel its all about them. I think women initiate most divorces because they are the most disillusioned with the whole arrangement.

My fav which sums it up is when a guy asks,
'what's wrong', she says 'nothing', and thinks 'if you loved me you wouldn't have to ask'. It just illustrates that they don't think of the guy as a real person, but some magical being that can transcend space & time.