I was told that there are ways that the pre nup could fail, and that the woman can still take everything you have some how. So no, I will chop the problems head off by the root and not marry at all.
I love how you assume the woman in your hypothetical relationship is basically a gold-digger housewife with no income. Don't you get to pick who you get involved with? She might make more money than you do. Ha ha!
I make that assumption because females are more likely to have a third party giving them money than males are, such as benefits.
Also, a female gold-digger has more of a chance of getting everything their partner worked for more than a male gold-digger.
Again... you get to choose who you want to be in a relationship with. So don't settle on a woman who will be financially dependent on you. Problem solved. It's not like this is a lottery!
And then say we want to start a family. One has to look after the child, and the man in the situation works. Then what? You can make assumptions on people you meet when you are on good terms with them, that doesn't mean they are incapable and won't do things for personal gain when the happiness fades, and then comes the divorce.
Daycare. Split the cost. And, it's not like the husband can't be the one to stay home with the child. Stay-at-home dads are more and more common these days. I get the feeling you're the type who feels the need to always have the last word, am I right?
So the child has to be raised half the time by childcare instead of a stable family unit?
I agree, it's not like the husband can't, although that isn't the topic. Even in situations in which he has stayed at home, and a divorce does happen, the female is likely to get custody, and the man will not get anything out of the divorce, where as in reverse, the woman gets everything he earned, and so on.
If a man stays at home, he risks far more than a female that stays at home.
He leaves his job to stay at home and look after the child and do housework, then what happens when they get divorced? What does he have? Even when he cared for the child the most, the child will be given to the mother for primary custody, and he's still have to pay child support.
Where as if a woman is a stay at home mother and a divorce happens, she gets the child, benefits to support her child (which end up being able to make a living on), single mother refuges, and so on.
You're blaming the victim. Relationships aren't made out of finance, they just end with them. You're implying that if someone went out with a financially dependent person, then it is part their fault for getting their belongings taken from them after divorce?...Well, same logic, if someone goes in to an abusive relationship, it is their fault for the abuse, because they should of chosen someone that isn't abusive. See? There are so many areas you have to consider.
Point being, just like someone stays with the person that is abusive because they have feelings for them, not because of the abuse, someone will stay with the person because they have feelings for them, not the financial gain. When the feelings fun out, then the financial part comes in.
You must not have been here for very long. This is IsItNormal. Everybody wants the last word. I am not going to lie in saying I don't prefer the last word, but I don't "need" the last word. Most of the time I reply is because I don't want to be rude.
Here in the US, any decent lawyer can give you a pre-nup as air-tight as an old Volkswagon Bug. Divorce here is like... ehh, whatever. It became a lucrative business afterwards.
Most if not all pre-nups have a very limited statute of limitations on them. They dont last in perpetuity, most likely because courts now that the liklihood of a divorce happening is close to 50% and if a pre-nups exists lawyers wont be needed and the legal system wont generate money for itself.
The majority, I would say 80%, expire after 10 years. And I am not quite sure about the possibility of setting one up longer then that.
No, I don't think all women are. A lot of women can and will, and I believe it is much more likely to find a woman that wil take everything I worked for after a divorce rather than find a woman that wouldn't.
The point is that they "can" do it, and since they "can" so many have, and I am not going to risk it.
Sorry, but if women wanted me to think differently, they should of acted differently.
I blame society and women for this. Women can get away with it, and so they do it, but if society decided for that to stop, women couldn't do it.
When my husband gets his CPA and starts making an ACCOUNTANT'S salary, I am going to have him buy me a house and a brand new car. Once I have some good stocks and bonds bought off of his money, I am going to take his ass to court, take all he has got, and fucking leave him in the road with a sign that says "Will do accounting for toilet paper" because by the time I am through with this bitch, he won't have two pennies to wipe his ass with, let alone, rub together.
They do sometimes fail yes. I don't know. Maybe because they are still relatively new in the UK. And not many people actually use them either.
Many people don't even marry now anyway. Divorce rates are quite high. Can see why some people won't even bother risking it.
Do you want to marry? (for guys)
↑ View this comment's parent
← View full post
I was told that there are ways that the pre nup could fail, and that the woman can still take everything you have some how. So no, I will chop the problems head off by the root and not marry at all.
--
tigerkid92
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
4
4
-
NeuroNeptunian
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
-
Anonymous Post Author
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
-
BlueJeansWhiteShirt
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
I love how you assume the woman in your hypothetical relationship is basically a gold-digger housewife with no income. Don't you get to pick who you get involved with? She might make more money than you do. Ha ha!
--
[Old Memory]
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
-1
-1
I make that assumption because females are more likely to have a third party giving them money than males are, such as benefits.
Also, a female gold-digger has more of a chance of getting everything their partner worked for more than a male gold-digger.
--
tigerkid92
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Again... you get to choose who you want to be in a relationship with. So don't settle on a woman who will be financially dependent on you. Problem solved. It's not like this is a lottery!
--
[Old Memory]
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
And then say we want to start a family. One has to look after the child, and the man in the situation works. Then what? You can make assumptions on people you meet when you are on good terms with them, that doesn't mean they are incapable and won't do things for personal gain when the happiness fades, and then comes the divorce.
--
tigerkid92
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Daycare. Split the cost. And, it's not like the husband can't be the one to stay home with the child. Stay-at-home dads are more and more common these days. I get the feeling you're the type who feels the need to always have the last word, am I right?
--
[Old Memory]
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
See More Comments =>
So the child has to be raised half the time by childcare instead of a stable family unit?
I agree, it's not like the husband can't, although that isn't the topic. Even in situations in which he has stayed at home, and a divorce does happen, the female is likely to get custody, and the man will not get anything out of the divorce, where as in reverse, the woman gets everything he earned, and so on.
If a man stays at home, he risks far more than a female that stays at home.
He leaves his job to stay at home and look after the child and do housework, then what happens when they get divorced? What does he have? Even when he cared for the child the most, the child will be given to the mother for primary custody, and he's still have to pay child support.
Where as if a woman is a stay at home mother and a divorce happens, she gets the child, benefits to support her child (which end up being able to make a living on), single mother refuges, and so on.
You're blaming the victim. Relationships aren't made out of finance, they just end with them. You're implying that if someone went out with a financially dependent person, then it is part their fault for getting their belongings taken from them after divorce?...Well, same logic, if someone goes in to an abusive relationship, it is their fault for the abuse, because they should of chosen someone that isn't abusive. See? There are so many areas you have to consider.
Point being, just like someone stays with the person that is abusive because they have feelings for them, not because of the abuse, someone will stay with the person because they have feelings for them, not the financial gain. When the feelings fun out, then the financial part comes in.
You must not have been here for very long. This is IsItNormal. Everybody wants the last word. I am not going to lie in saying I don't prefer the last word, but I don't "need" the last word. Most of the time I reply is because I don't want to be rude.
Here in the US, any decent lawyer can give you a pre-nup as air-tight as an old Volkswagon Bug. Divorce here is like... ehh, whatever. It became a lucrative business afterwards.
--
[Old Memory]
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Most if not all pre-nups have a very limited statute of limitations on them. They dont last in perpetuity, most likely because courts now that the liklihood of a divorce happening is close to 50% and if a pre-nups exists lawyers wont be needed and the legal system wont generate money for itself.
The majority, I would say 80%, expire after 10 years. And I am not quite sure about the possibility of setting one up longer then that.
I understand your point of view but you're assuming that all women are money-minded.
--
[Old Memory]
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
No, I don't think all women are. A lot of women can and will, and I believe it is much more likely to find a woman that wil take everything I worked for after a divorce rather than find a woman that wouldn't.
The point is that they "can" do it, and since they "can" so many have, and I am not going to risk it.
Sorry, but if women wanted me to think differently, they should of acted differently.
I blame society and women for this. Women can get away with it, and so they do it, but if society decided for that to stop, women couldn't do it.
--
NeuroNeptunian
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
-
Anonymous Post Author
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Exactly.
When my husband gets his CPA and starts making an ACCOUNTANT'S salary, I am going to have him buy me a house and a brand new car. Once I have some good stocks and bonds bought off of his money, I am going to take his ass to court, take all he has got, and fucking leave him in the road with a sign that says "Will do accounting for toilet paper" because by the time I am through with this bitch, he won't have two pennies to wipe his ass with, let alone, rub together.
I'm super cereal.
--
[Old Memory]
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Super cereal, you guyz.
--
NeuroNeptunian
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
NOBODY BELIEVES ME BUT I'M SUPER CEREAL.
--
[Old Memory]
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
MANBEARPIG! SUPER CEREAL!
Oh now I understand more clearly your point of view
They do sometimes fail yes. I don't know. Maybe because they are still relatively new in the UK. And not many people actually use them either.
Many people don't even marry now anyway. Divorce rates are quite high. Can see why some people won't even bother risking it.