Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It may vary from case to case. Imagine a guy who made six figures compared to his wife who barely made 30,000. No children, both working outside of home, etc. Then comes divorce and she gets half? He made the big purchases and she still gets half of it? both making similar amounts of money, making big purchases equally, etc. different story.
That is what I'm saying, yes. I was the significantly higher earner when I divorced my ex. Although he didn't earn as much as I did, I enjoyed the benefits he provided in other areas of our life that can't be measured in dollars. We were equally invested.
In short, I feel that splitting assets acquired during marriage is about as fair as you can possibly expect a court of law to be.
If that doesn't appeal to you, then a pre-nup should be in place so that you and your SO are on the same page before you enter into marriage.
In short, I feel that splitting assets acquired during marriage is about as fair as you can possibly expect a court of law to be
Sure. If we both worked on getting something TOGETHER, I agree. But let’s say the husband made more than the wife, which is more common than the other way around, and he ended paying the most for the house while she contributed to expenses such as groceries, a bill here and there, etc. Then comes divorce and what? She gets half of the house? I can understand if BOTH bought the car together, fine, split it.
Quote:
If that doesn't appeal to you, then a pre-nup should be in place so that you and your SO are on the same page before you enter into marriage.
Sounds good but even though divorce can be biased towards men I don’t like the idea of pre-nup, the whole meaning of it.
Sure. If we both worked on getting something TOGETHER, I agree. But let’s say the husband made more than the wife, which is more common than the other way around, and he ended paying the most for the house while she contributed to expenses such as groceries, a bill here and there, etc. Then comes divorce and what? She gets half of the house? I can understand if BOTH bought the car together, fine, split it.
Again, the scenario you described above is similar to the arrangement I had in my first marriage (which ended in divorce). I was the breadwinner by far. We split half the assets acquired during the marriage which I consider fair. He came from old money and had plenty of property and assets (from inheritances) so he lived a better lifestyle after the divorce than I did. Whatever, who cares?
If you demand/insist that everything be perfectly equal, then date and marry a woman who earns exactly the same amount as you do (no more and no less) and don't have children - because having your child might require her to lose income and that will complicate your calculations should a divorce happen. Also, make sure nether of you ever face an illness or lose a job or anything like that because it will throw things too far off balance for your comfort level.
Again, the scenario you described above is similar to the arrangement I had in my first marriage (which ended in divorce). I was the breadwinner by far. We split half the assets acquired during the marriage which I consider fair. He came from old money and had plenty of property and assets (from inheritances) so he lived a better lifestyle after the divorce than I did. Whatever, who cares?
If you wanted to go that route, who cares what others say I guess.
I am surprised you went out with a guy like that and even married him considering how you have been clear about how you like guys who have money, spend on you lavishly, give you the whole traditional chivalrous treatment, etc. while you don’t reciprocate. Did your views change after that experience?
Quote:
If you demand/insist that everything be perfectly equal, then date and marry a woman who earns exactly the same amount as you do
Nope. Doesn’t have to be exactly equal, has to be fair.
Quote:
and don't have children - because having your child might require her to lose income and that will complicate your calculations should a divorce happen
Having children means she keeps them as well as other assets “in benefit of the children”. It’s advisable for men to have their wife work as alimony can be another expense or the whole “she can’t live on her own after divorce”. Doesn’t guarantee men 100% to have their assets saved but better than nothing.
Quote:
Also, make sure nether of you ever face an illness or lose a job or anything like that because it will throw things too far off balance for your comfort level.
Now that you mention “comfort level”, something I find interesting about women who divorce and ask for another amount of money to continue living as they were used to while they were married. Imagine how it would be if men came back saying that, ok, they’ll send more money to her so she can live to what she was accustomed but they, as men, also want to continue living to what they were accustomed to which means having his exwife visit him throughout the week to cook for him, wash his clothes, mop the kitchen floors, give him some sex, etc. Now that would be quite fair for BOTH, don’t you think? She would receive the check from the ex-husband so she can continue living as she was before and he would receive his part from her too as it was before they split.
Now that you mention “comfort level”, something I find interesting about women who divorce and ask for another amount of money to continue living as they were used to while they were married is that imagine how it would be if men came back saying that, ok, they’ll send more money to her so she can live to what she was accustomed but they, as men, also want to continue living to what they were accustomed to which means having his exwife visit him throughout the week to cook for him, wash his clothes, mop the kitchen floors, give him some sex, etc. Now that would be quite fair for BOTH, don’t you think? She would receive the check from the ex-husband so she can continue living as she was before and he would receive his part from her too.
You're full of original ideas, arentcha?! This one makes sense, for a change, though.
It may vary from case to case. Imagine a guy who made six figures compared to his wife who barely made 30,000. No children, both working outside of home, etc. Then comes divorce and she gets half? He made the big purchases and she still gets half of it? both making similar amounts of money, making big purchases equally, etc. different story.
I don't see a problem with splitting everything accumulated DURING the marriage 50/50 nor do I see a problem with child support.
Where I have a problem is where one spouse gets almost everything plus alimony for life even if they are the ones who caused the divorce.
Sorry, but I'm not going to be cool with paying Alimony if she cheats or decides that she is "unhappy".
Where I have a problem is where one spouse gets almost everything plus alimony for life even if they are the ones who caused the divorce
It is women who generally ask for divorce, get custody, alimony, keep the goods, etc. No wonder men may be more reluctant to ask for divorce knowing their consequences as men.
Quote:
Sorry, but I'm not going to be cool with paying Alimony if she cheats or decides that she is "unhappy".
Can’t do much to change the system unfortunately. I also wish it was less biased towards men but what can you do?
...Sounds good but even though divorce can be biased towards men I don’t like the idea of pre-nup, the whole meaning of it.
There is no way that divorce is biased towards men. From what I have seen, it is the opposite: men are hugely discriminated against in both divorce and custody.
The myth that women fare worse than men financially after a divorce has also been debunked.
You are supposed to have an undying trust, for better or worse. Going into a marriage with a prenuptial agreement is really saying "I dont buy into the for better or worse till death do us part". People say "Well you just protect yourself with a prenup".. You shouldnt be marrying that person in the first place then!
I'd give it to her even if she didn't want it. I don't want or need her money or things. That's not what it is about. Here...sign this! What? It's for you....
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
.
.
