# Divorce



## frenchpaddy (May 31, 2021)

this is not a topic to hit out at women but a number of women say in their posts that they are only staying because they have nowhere to go 
which brings me to my topic 
divorce what makes people think they have the right to they have a right to walk away with more than they had before they went in ,
I except that people agree that one can put their job before the others , and if so there has to be a evening out , 
but I have seen some post here about men agree to take on anothers guys kid and then give years paying 
EVERY STATE OR COUNTRY HAS DIFFERENT laws AND MOST ARE BAD


----------



## boonez40 (Jun 11, 2021)

frenchpaddy said:


> this is not a topic to hit out at women but a number of women say in their posts that they are only staying because they have nowhere to go
> which brings me to my topic
> divorce what makes people think they have the right to they have a right to walk away with more than they had before they went in ,
> I except that people agree that one can put their job before the others , and if so there has to be a evening out ,
> ...


Thats the price you pay for your ethics and morals. 

A man has one thing in this life, and that is his word. Once you break your word, you have nothing else to offer. I have always tried to keep my word. 

I have a daughter, she is not mine biological but she is mine, I am her father and that is that. If my wife would decide to jump boat, thats on her. But that little girl is my daughter and will be to the day I die. The courts do not have to tell me to support my daughter, I already know it is my duty. My daughter does not know and she never has to know that I did not create her. 

Now I will do everything in my power to make the marriage work, I will do without before giving up a second with my children. That is just the way it has to be. 

You see, I grew up alone. The only friend I had while growing up was the guy up the street. His only goal was to get my penis in his mouth ever day. From the age of 7 to the age of 12 I was molested until the shame became unbearable that I started lifting weights and put a stop to it. 

There is no way in Hell I will ever put my kids in a situation as my parents put me in. So I will go on with life as if nothing is wrong. I will die a little inside everyday but my kids will know that I love them and they are mine no matter what. 
End of story 

If you do not have the guts to endure for your children and your word, than you better make better decisions. 

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk


----------



## Diana7 (Apr 19, 2016)

boonez40 said:


> Thats the price you pay for your ethics and morals.
> 
> A man has one thing in this life, and that is his word. Once you break your word, you have nothing else to offer. I have always tried to keep my word.
> 
> ...


I am the same, my children always came first no matter what. My own selfish wants and needs didnt figure into anything unless they were cared for. There is no way that I could ever leave my children, not for anything.


----------



## oldshirt (Apr 1, 2017)

I too have noticed lots and lots of posts, both here but especially Reddit where women actually HATE their husbands and have absolutely zero attraction or desire for them and are in fact repulsed by their touch, but remain in the marriage due to having no independent income or even marketable job skills or education. 

The men too are very unhappy and frustrated but they also feel trapped as they will have to shell out crippling child and spousal support. 

And then when you throw in children from prior relationships/hook ups, it further complicates the matter and adds additional expense to both. 

The old paradigm of breadwinner husband and uneducated/no job skill SAHM is a threat to both men and women. 

Any man who thinks he can marry a high school graduate working at Walmart and have her be a career SAHM living happily ever after and won’t lose his shirt in a divorce in today’s world is not only naive and dumb, but quite possibly delusional.


----------



## frenchpaddy (May 31, 2021)

I feel if you have children you have to step up and help out pay their costs , until at least 18 but
I THINK THAT GOES IF YOU ARE HUSBAND TO THE MOTHER OR JUST A ONE NIGHT STAND 
But children are often used to the war between two people that say they love their kids but can't stand their mother or father , 
so I have nothing against if you dip your wick you pay , but if your helping to pay you should al so take a role in how they grow up , 
I know some only get to spend 2 weeks in summer and 1 week at Christmas because not every one can live down the street from the person they made a child with 


but the big question here is people that stay together because they can't pay the costs of a second house or they gave up a job to be at home while the other was free to spend more time 
claiming up in the job side ,


----------



## SpinyNorman (Jan 24, 2018)

frenchpaddy said:


> divorce what makes people think they have the right to they have a right to walk away with more than they had before they went in ,


Your post is pretty difficult to understand, but as for this part, I have an answer. If the couple's assets grew while married, most places consider the new assets to be split 50/50, at least in theory so one or both spouses might well walk away w/ more than they arrived with.


----------



## Torninhalf (Nov 4, 2018)

SpinyNorman said:


> Your post is pretty difficult to understand, but as for this part, I have an answer. If the couple's assets grew while married, most places consider the new assets to be split 50/50, at least in theory so one or both spouses might well walk away w/ more than they arrived with.


When I got married we had nothing. I mean nothing. Over the course of 30 plus years he now has a great career while I don’t. We decided early on I would raise the kids and work jobs around them to supplement our income. It worked great for us both. Now I find myself trying to figure out how I will be able to support myself even with spousal support and half our assets. He will financially be far better off than I. Will I leave with more than I came into the marriage with? Absolutely but not enough to be financially secure like him.


----------



## frenchpaddy (May 31, 2021)

SpinyNorman said:


> Your post is pretty difficult to understand, but as for this part, I have an answer. If the couple's assets grew while married, most places consider the new assets to be split 50/50, at least in theory so one or both spouses might well walk away w/ more than they arrived with.


 yes I agree with this , but the part you have before going in should be not up for grabs , having said that when i met my wife she had nothing , and i had the proprietary after been together for 10 years and I know the woman I WAS WITH WAS with me for the long term so I made half over on her , 

with regard to not been easy to follow my post that i can understand as I was born with something that makes it hard to put my thoughts together in a organised fashion it is like dyslexic but in words not spelling


----------



## oldshirt (Apr 1, 2017)

frenchpaddy said:


> but the big question here is people that stay together because they can't pay the costs of a second house or they gave up a job to be at home while the other was free to spend more time
> claiming up in the job side ,



I’m not sure I am following you. 

Can you explain the question a little more clearly?


----------



## BigDaddyNY (May 19, 2021)

My wife and I started off with next to nothing. I joined the Army and she uprooted herself to stay with me. She found jobs for herself while I was enlisted, but it is hard to start a career when you are moving a lot. Once we got out she started on a career path, but then we had kids and we decided to have her stay at home since by then my career allowed us to get by on one income. Once the kids went into school she got back onto a career path, but it will never catch up to where I'm at in my career. As far as I'm concerned though, everything I've attained and earned in my career is ours, not mine. I don't see us ever getting divorce, but as far as I'm concerned she is owed half of everything I've got. I don't see how it could be any other way. I can't say where she would be in her career if we had not married, but that is irrelevant. She is where she is because of me/us and I have a responsibility to her.


----------



## oldshirt (Apr 1, 2017)

Torninhalf said:


> When I got married we had nothing. I mean nothing. Over the course of 30 plus years he now has a great career while I don’t. We decided early on I would raise the kids and work jobs around them to supplement our income. It worked great for us both. Now I find myself trying to figure out how I will be able to support myself even with spousal support and half our assets. He will financially be far better off than I. Will I leave with more than I came into the marriage with? Absolutely but not enough to be financially secure like him.


This is what I was referring to in my post above. 

The paradigm of one breadwinner/provider and one full time SAHP without marketable career training or skills is outdated and an unacceptable risk to both men and women. 

In our grandparents era, there was so much societal and religious pressure and even the ways the laws were written that pretty much forced people to stay together despite how miserable they were. 

Today divorce is an acceptable and common part of the landscape. 

Men and women both need to go into marriage with the knowledge and resources to be able to survive and mitigate the costs of divorce.


----------



## frenchpaddy (May 31, 2021)

oldshirt said:


> I’m not sure I am following you.
> 
> Can you explain the question a little more clearly?


 to make it easy 
say you have nothing and your wife got 500k from her father , you find out after 2 years you can't live with her 
but she stays at home and minds house kids and she gave up her 20k job to do it and helped you go to uni and you land a good job and after 10 years you are big shot living the high life and she has no job now are you ok walking away with your job and she nothing only what she came in with , 

why it is hard to follow is there is no simple response laws are make but what is fair is not all ways good law


----------



## Torninhalf (Nov 4, 2018)

oldshirt said:


> This is what I was referring to in my post above.
> 
> The paradigm of one breadwinner/provider and one full time SAHP without marketable career training or skills is outdated and an unacceptable risk to both men and women.
> 
> ...


I am not without skill as I have always worked like I stated. I just didn’t take the career path. It took him decades to obtain the earning potential he has now. It seems from your post I should have put my children into second position as to maintain the same career trajectory as him less we find ourselves divorcing.


----------



## frenchpaddy (May 31, 2021)

i give you an example couple got married it was his second marriage I don't know the story about the first brake up just he had 5 girls and never paid a penny in in up bringing of the 5 girls with the second wife they had 2 they build a house and he paid for the house she paid the rest , they broke up she got 450 a month for the kids out of his business , he got the house because he proved he paid for it , and he sold his business and went for early retirement so the kids got nothing from him


----------



## oldshirt (Apr 1, 2017)

@Torninhalf 

In today’s world - yes. 

Or more accurately both men and women need to have the education/job training and career background and maintenance of those skills prior to legal commitment and children so as to be able to be self supportive in the 50/50 likelihood of divorce. 

30 years ago many of us were still living under vestiges of the rapidly dissolving traditional marriage despite the writing on the wall.

Today it’s just plain nuts to go into marriage thinking that one is going to be immune from divorce and equally delusional for a guy to think that he can marry someone with minimal education/job training and think that having a SAHM for 10-15+ years and not get taken to the cleaners in a divorce.


----------



## Torninhalf (Nov 4, 2018)

oldshirt said:


> @Torninhalf
> 
> In today’s world - yes.
> 
> ...


Well in my defense it was not today’s world. It was the 1980’s. It is what it is and I will make it work. I just find it terribly sad for all the children who will have to be farmed out to strangers to raise them because people no longer know how to take wedding vows seriously.


----------



## oldshirt (Apr 1, 2017)

frenchpaddy said:


> i give you an example couple got married it was his second marriage I don't know the story about the first brake up just he had 5 girls and never paid a penny in in up bringing of the 5 girls with the second wife they had 2 they build a house and he paid for the house she paid the rest , they broke up she got 450 a month for the kids out of his business , he got the house because he proved he paid for it , and he sold his business and went for early retirement so the kids got nothing from him


It’s stuff like that why the court system and public sentiment is weighed so heavily in favor of the women in divorce.


----------



## oldshirt (Apr 1, 2017)

Torninhalf said:


> Well in my defense it was not today’s world. It was the 1980’s. It is what it is and I will make it work. I just find it terribly sad for all the children who will have to be farmed out to strangers to raise them because people no longer know how to take wedding vows seriously.


I’m not pointing fingers at you or saying you did anything wrong. I believe you and i are roughly the same age and we were brought up in a different world back then.

My point is people today need to adapt to the world today and in today’s world it’s ridiculous to think that one will marry their sweetheart and live a Ward and June Cleaver existence forever without each paying heavily in the event of a divorce which is just a coin toss.


----------



## Torninhalf (Nov 4, 2018)

oldshirt said:


> I’m not pointing fingers at you or saying you did anything wrong. I believe you and i are roughly the same age and we were brought up in a different world back then.
> 
> My point is people today need to adapt to the world today and in today’s world it’s ridiculous to think that one will marry their sweetheart and live a Ward and June Cleaver existence forever without each paying heavily in the event of a divorce which is just a coin toss.


Sad state of affairs. Don’t know why anyone would bother marrying anymore. 🤷🏼‍♀️


----------



## oldshirt (Apr 1, 2017)

I want to add another point for consideration here.

35 years ago in my youth, it was just a societal assumption that one would marry and have children. 

We were all indoctrinated that you marry and have kids - period. 

People need to challenge that assumption and apply conscious choice as to whether to submit to legally binding relationship commitment and having children or not. 

Most men probably should not marry and have kids at all. 

A significant percentage of women probably shouldn’t either. 

If someone does consciously decide that they want to marry/children, they need to do so with full knowledge of the statistical awareness of the divorce rate and awareness of the family court system works in the event of divorce.

And with that knowledge, people need to take steps to be able to mitigate the costs and damage of divorce. 

Divorce is here, it is a real thing, it happens to good people who do all the right things. It’s not a vague concept that only happens to the other guy/gal and it doesn’t only happen to the bad people.


----------



## RebuildingMe (Aug 18, 2019)

Marriage rates are on the decline. Humans adapt. It may take a generation or two. 40 years ago you didn’t have father’s rights groups either. There was no need. Blame feminism. There’s a female attorney named Marilyn York (I believe that’s her name) making a cleaning by only representing men and fathers in divorce. She did a Ted Talk.


----------



## oldshirt (Apr 1, 2017)

Torninhalf said:


> Sad state of affairs. Don’t know why anyone would bother marrying anymore. 🤷🏼‍♀️


I’m not that pessimistic. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with marriage as an institution. 

I just think people need to be fully aware of the risks and costs and ramifications of marriage and divorce. 

I think they need to be aware of the statistics on divorce and not think they will somehow be immune. 

With that all in mind, people need to decide for themselves whether marriage/children are right for them or not and then make a conscious choice. 

With that choice, they need to take the proper precautions and steps to mitigate those costs and risks so they are not financially and emotionally damaged in the 50/50 event of a divorce.


----------



## frenchpaddy (May 31, 2021)

oldshirt said:


> It’s stuff like that why the court system and public sentiment is weighed so heavily in favor of the women in divorce.


it was french court , and happens other in france


----------



## Diana7 (Apr 19, 2016)

I am one of these people who believes in the words ' with all my worldly goods I thee endow' . So when I marry what was his and mine now becomes ours and everything that we get in marriage is ours. We share a bank account, and all income no matter where from( including any inheritance) is joint. 
I honestly can't see the point in getting married if you are going to hang onto things for yourself and not share everything you have. 
As for a divorce, it's about firstly making sure the children have a home and are provided for. Then making sure that there is fairness in how assets are divided and that both can afford to live and pay the bills, albeit often with less income.


----------



## frenchpaddy (May 31, 2021)

Diana7 said:


> I am one of these people who believes in the words ' with all my worldly goods I thee endow' . So when I marry what was his and mine now becomes ours and everything that we get in marriage is ours. We share a bank account, and all income no matter where from( including any inheritance) is joint.
> I honestly can't see the point in getting married if you are going to hang onto things for yourself and not share everything you have.
> As for a divorce, it's about firstly making sure the children have a home and are provided for. Then making sure that there is fairness in how assets are divided and that both can afford to live and pay the bills, albeit often with less income.


 same here bank account business is 50/50 we swap mobile phones no locks on any pc can let to many windows open and nothing to hide ,


----------



## Openminded (Feb 21, 2013)

I married in a very different world over 50 years ago. I felt from the beginning that I wanted to be able to support myself (if necessary) and that I only wanted to have one child. I stayed home with my child for the first year or so and then I slowly resumed my career but not at the same level as before I had a child to consider. 

Someone had to be responsible for keeping life running smoothly while my husband busily climbed the corporate ladder and that someone was me. Did I make anywhere near the money that he did? Absolutely not. But had it been necessary I could have comfortably supported myself and our child — minus all the luxuries that my husband’s salary allowed us.

The way I view life in general — and marriage especially — is that when you make a choice you take a chance that it might not work out and you need to be willing to pay the price when it doesn’t. I had a very long marriage but that time’s done and I have no interest in marrying again. Maybe if I were still young I might consider it but my guess is if I had divorced sooner I still wouldn’t have remarried. It doesn’t work for everyone.


----------



## RebuildingMe (Aug 18, 2019)

My STBX has a good career, makes slightly more than I do, and always professed throughout our marriage that she was a strong independent woman that didn’t need any money from anyone. Yet here we are 8 days into trial because she wants $2000/month in child support even though we may have the kids equal time. Don’t I have a mortgage to pay for and a house to run with utility bills?

My point is, as anyone knows after going through a divorce, people change their tune and usually go for the jugular.


----------



## joannacroc (Dec 17, 2014)

I think it's more complicated than that. My parents love each other even though they bicker a lot. At one point when my sister was being particularly hard to deal with my parents went through a rough patch. My mother said she wanted to divorce but couldn't afford to. 

It was actually true. Because my mother brought us up full time while my dad was working, but she also had a huge impact on his career. The unwritten rule I think back then at least was that part of the company culture was entertaining your colleagues or potential business partners. My mother threw dinner parties for colleagues, friends, work people for YEARS. She was practically a caterer. She charmed and schmoozed and despite my dad's intelligence, I DO think she had at least a partial role in his climb up the corporate ladder. He made a good living before his retirement, and was at least in part able to have kids because he had a wife who was willing to forgo a career to raise them. He traveled a lot. Had they decided to go through with a divorce I would rarely have seen him. Would she have left with more than they both came into the marriage with? I hope so. Because when they married they weren't well off or even comfortable at all. And she was a huge support to him. So I do agree that in some circumstances it is the right and moral thing that the wife or husband or whoever raised the kids at the agreement of both parties so the other could work shouldn't live in poverty just because they weren't the wage earner.


----------



## oldshirt (Apr 1, 2017)

Diana7 said:


> I am one of these people who believes in the words ' with all my worldly goods I thee endow' . So when I marry what was his and mine now becomes ours and everything that we get in marriage is ours. We share a bank account, and all income no matter where from( including any inheritance) is joint.
> I honestly can't see the point in getting married if you are going to hang onto things for yourself and not share everything you have.


I’ll tell you why many people want to have their own educations, job skills, financial accounts and resources from both female and male POVs.

Ladies first - Many women today have watched generations of women virtually trapped in their own homes due to lack of economic resources to leave abusive or chronically hostile situations due to having no assets of their own and no current education or marketable job skills. 

They have watched their mothers and grandmothers beg for every cent and have to justify every purchase to their breadwinnihg spouse.

Then if the abuse and control gets too bad, they flee in the night with the clothes on their back with kids under each arm and have to depend on the mercy and sanctuary of relatives or women’s shelters and then have to rely generosity of lawyers and courts to assist her through the legal minefield for protection and advocacy. 

From the male POV, we have all watched men work their way through college, cling and claw their way up the corporate ladder or live on Ramen Noodles in the early days of entrepreneurship until they are making decent money and are able to get nice houses and cars and vacations and live in nice neighborhoods etc and are able to save for their futures. 

Then once they are successful they catch the eye of a little cutie that waits tables with her high school diploma. She rubs up against him and tells him about her dreams of children and the white picket fence and sitting on the porch together sipping lemonade in their golden years. 

However once she craps out a litter of kids that he is slaying dragons and building pyramids 60-80 hours a week to pay for,,, She gets bored and frustrated at home and starts banging Sven From Yoga. 

When she decides life would be funnier with Sven or Chad, she garners support and encouragement from all her friends and she files for D and asks for thousands and thousands a month in child support, thousands and thousand a month in spousal support plus his 401k and investments that his financial acumen built up for their security over the years. 

And then all she has to do is make a false report of abuse or threats of violence and he is immediately labeled a criminal and has restraining orders placed on him and denied access to the children for which he is forced to garnish his wages on. 

And of course let’s not forget the daily stories of dead bedrooms and dead marriages we see here daily by both men and women that are in lifeless, loveless marriages with people that don’t even like them. It neither can leave due to being crippled by the divorce machine.

THAT is why people need to have their own resources, financial accounts and means to support themselves in the event of a divorce which is just a coin toss as to whether it will statistically occur or not.


----------



## Diana7 (Apr 19, 2016)

Openminded said:


> I married in a very different world over 50 years ago. I felt from the beginning that I wanted to be able to support myself (if necessary) and that I only wanted to have one child. I stayed home with my child for the first year or so and then I slowly resumed my career but not at the same level as before I had a child to consider.
> 
> Someone had to be responsible for keeping life running smoothly while my husband busily climbed the corporate ladder and that someone was me. Did I make anywhere near the money that he did? Absolutely not. But had it been necessary I could have comfortably supported myself and our child — minus all the luxuries that my husband’s salary allowed us.
> 
> The way I view life in general — and marriage especially — is that when you make a choice you take a chance that it might not work out and you need to be willing to pay the price when it doesn’t. I had a very long marriage but that time’s done and I have no interest in marrying again. Maybe if I were still young I might consider it but my guess is if I had divorced sooner I still wouldn’t have remarried. It doesn’t work for everyone.


We married young and had three children. Caring for them all as well as running a home was very much a full time job and more. Especially as two had a chronic health condition. I had part time jobs over the years because we needed the money but my main and most important job was to bring up three children. My then husband said more that once that he could never do my job and going out to his paid work was easier. I always wanted to be at home with the children though. 

When my marriage ended after 25 years it wasn't easy being a single mum but I just about managed to pay the bills and we didn't starve. 

I was only in my mid 40's so was hoping I would marry again which I did after 6 years, but if anything happened to my husband now I would have no interest in dating or being in a relationship again so I get where you are coming from.


----------



## Diana7 (Apr 19, 2016)

oldshirt said:


> I’ll tell you why many people want to have their own educations, job skills, financial accounts and resources from both female and male POVs.
> 
> Ladies first - Many women today have watched generations of women virtually trapped in their own homes due to lack of economic resources to leave abusive or chronically hostile situations due to having no assets of their own and no current education or marketable job skills.
> 
> ...


That's how you see things, it's not how I do. For me my main priority was always to bring up the children and be there for them. Money has never been much of an issue for me, I can and have managed on very little, especially in the years I was a single mum.
However much you think you must have or earn to get married or have children gives you no guarantees of anything. For many it would never be enough and they would just never do it and then they may well regret leaving it so long.
Sometimes things in life are a risk, no matter how much you try and get your ducks in a row, things happen that change everything and mess you all your plans. Loss of a job. Sickness. Loss of investments. Bereavement. Accident.

I don't regret marrying young when we had little money, nor having children young. I have no regrets at all in staying home raising my children, even if that meant we had less money.

It also doesn't change the fact that for us everything is shared. Marriage is a joining together of everything including money and possessions. The idea that I should keep money for myself in some secret bank account just in case is against all that I am.


----------



## Al_Bundy (Mar 14, 2021)

The risk/reward on marriage for men is highly skewed towards the risk end. 

People today (both men and women) have no excuse to not have some kind of marketable skill. It's not the 80s anymore where you have to leave your house to start a business, get training, or a degree. I totally get the older women buying into the old social contract of marriage because as others have said that's what everyone was taught, but not if you got married in this century.


----------



## Diana7 (Apr 19, 2016)

Al_Bundy said:


> The risk/reward on marriage for men is highly skewed towards the risk end.
> 
> People today (both men and women) have no excuse to not have some kind of marketable skill. It's not the 80s anymore where you have to leave your house to start a business, get training, or a degree. I totally get the older women buying into the old social contract of marriage because as others have said that's what everyone was taught, but not if you got married in this century.


Most men I know wouldn't agree with you.


----------



## frenchpaddy (May 31, 2021)

we lived in a different world , if I was to give advice to my children in regard to protecting them in relationship to marriage I don't know what to say


----------



## RebuildingMe (Aug 18, 2019)

frenchpaddy said:


> we lived in a different world , if I was to give advice to my children in regard to protecting them in relationship to marriage I don't know what to say


If you truly want to “protect” your kids, the only rationale advice you can give to them is not to get married.


----------



## Diana7 (Apr 19, 2016)

RebuildingMe said:


> If you truly want to “protect” your kids, the only rationale advice you can give to them is not to get married.


I would never give them that advise.


----------



## RebuildingMe (Aug 18, 2019)

Diana7 said:


> I would never give them that advise.


Of course you wouldn’t. We all know that. That’s what I was responding to French and not you.


----------



## oldshirt (Apr 1, 2017)

Diana7 said:


> Most men I know wouldn't agree with you.


They may smile politely and nod their heads and say they agree with you, but any smart man that has two eyes and can see what is really happening in the world agrees with @Al_Bundy


----------



## Diana7 (Apr 19, 2016)

oldshirt said:


> They may smile politely and nod their heads and say they agree with you, but any smart man that has two eyes and can see what is really happening in the world agrees with @Al_Bundy


Talking about the guys I know v well. Family, close friends, husband.


----------



## oldshirt (Apr 1, 2017)

Diana7 said:


> That's how you see things, it's not how I do. For me my main priority was always to bring up the children and be there for them. Money has never been much of an issue for me, I can and have managed on very little, especially in the years I was a single mum.
> However much you think you must have or earn to get married or have children gives you no guarantees of anything. For many it would never be enough and they would just never do it and then they may well regret leaving it so long.
> Sometimes things in life are a risk, no matter how much you try and get your ducks in a row, things happen that change everything and mess you all your plans. Loss of a job. Sickness. Loss of investments. Bereavement. Accident.
> 
> ...


I never said anything about about keeping accounts “secret.”

My wife and I have had separate accounts and separate credit cards and 401ks etc since day-one. It’s no secret (the courts frown on secret accounts in fact) 

You are correct in that there are risks and unexpected things will invariably happen. 

But the risk is more heavily skewed to the person with the greater assets and resources, which more often than not is the man, but can also be the woman.

The fact that the court systems are often biased against the men must also be assumed. 

It’s easy to preach sharing all assets and that all assets belong to all when you are the one with lesser assets and lesser resources. 

Marriage and divorce law work in favor of the one with lesser assets.


----------



## oldshirt (Apr 1, 2017)

Diana7 said:


> Talking about the guys I know v well. Family, close friends, husband.


Doesn’t change a thing I said. 

If they’re the least bit smart and observant in the world, they are only saying they agree with you.


----------



## oldshirt (Apr 1, 2017)

RebuildingMe said:


> If you truly want to “protect” your kids, the only rationale advice you can give to them is not to get married.


I wouldn’t put it quite like that. 

My kids are both in their upper teens. I do not tell them not to ever marry.

I do tell them that marriage is a legal and financial construct however that carries many legal and financial risks, obligations and ramifications. 

I am quite blunt that the divorce rate is roughly 50/50 and nothing they do will make them immune or bulletproof from the ramifications of divorce. 

My # 1 preaching point is that they need to be a mature, educated, self-supporting adult and any potential partner needs to also be a mature, educated, self-supporting adult before even considering it. 

Rule #2 is to always have their own stream(s) of income, back account(s) and line of credit so that they are always ready, willing and able to walk out the front door and into their own place and mind their own affairs at any time day or night. 

If they follow those two simple rules, then they will be ready to at least save their own bacon when the $hyte goes down.


----------



## Al_Bundy (Mar 14, 2021)

RebuildingMe said:


> My STBX has a good career, makes slightly more than I do, and always professed throughout our marriage that she was a strong independent woman that didn’t need any money from anyone. Yet here we are 8 days into trial because she wants $2000/month in child support even though we may have the kids equal time. Don’t I have a mortgage to pay for and a house to run with utility bills?
> 
> My point is, as anyone knows after going through a divorce, people change their tune and usually go for the jugular.


She will probably tell everyone how she doesn't need a man as she takes your money. As long as the court system continues to prop up one party at the expense of the other this will never change. The worst part is they hide behind the old "best for the children" line.


----------



## Diana7 (Apr 19, 2016)

oldshirt said:


> I never said anything about about keeping accounts “secret.”
> 
> My wife and I have had separate accounts and separate credit cards and 401ks etc since day-one. It’s no secret (the courts frown on secret accounts in fact)
> 
> ...


As it happens I came into marriage with more assets than him, I had a house, so what you say doesn't apply to me. It didn't change how I see marriage and the fact that all we have is ours jointly.
It would never occur to me to separate money or accounts into his or mine. What's mine is his and what's his is mine.
That's how I see marriage.


----------



## Diana7 (Apr 19, 2016)

oldshirt said:


> Doesn’t change a thing I said.
> 
> If they’re the least bit smart and observant in the world, they are only saying they agree with you.


It's what I observe and hear, not what they say to me about the subject. I am fortunate to know some v happily married couples.


----------



## Diana7 (Apr 19, 2016)

Al_Bundy said:


> She will probably tell everyone how she doesn't need a man as she takes your money. As long as the court system continues to prop up one party at the expense of the other this will never change. The worst part is they hide behind the old "best for the children" line.


The children's needs should always be paramount.


----------



## hamadryad (Aug 30, 2020)

Diana7 said:


> The children's needs should always be paramount.



We disagree often, but I agree here....

I dunno...."I am gonna take _her_ to the cleaners"....said no man ever....Yet it's the rallying cry of every woman who ever gets divorced...

Many experts say that the actual "success" rate of a long term marriage might be somewhere between 10 and 15%....I know not that many divorced, but there are a big chunk of people that should be and aren't for whatever the reason...That doesn't constitute success...

If you are a guy and have success in your DNA, then you would be wise to think this through and install some protections before you get married...I could list a hundred tales of woe here that most of you wouldn't believe...Horribly one sided judgements...

Thankfully a lot of these antiquated laws are starting to be thrown away...Like lifetime alimony...Ridiculous...

Most of the bookkeepers that worked for me over the years were women that were either SAHM or just worked out of their houses...And we have seen over the past few years how many careers will let you work from home....

At the end of the day, women should no longer consider a marriage as a way to a lifetime of financial security and guys should approach it from the standpoint of protection in the event(or likelihood) that it will end..I think we are seeing a pretty radical shift, anyway....I still believe women love the idea of the marriage, the dress, the parties, the attention, etc, but guys aren't jumping at this anymore...The rates of marriage have significantly plunged..And women will be making more than a lot of men on average in my lifetime anyway...

I have always contended that one way to address this is make a marriage contract like your drivers license...You have to renew it every 4 years...If you are happy, you can have a mini wedding and renew vows...If there is doubt, or you are miserable, no divorce needed...Just don't renew and you are done...Obviously kids will have to be provided for appropriately, but no one will be responsible for another adult person after it ends...That's it...Most people at that point will know this going in and prepare themselves rather than it being so drama filled and painful like it is right now...Put a lot of d-bag lawyers out of business at the same time...Win -win...


----------



## Al_Bundy (Mar 14, 2021)

Diana7 said:


> The children's needs should always be paramount.


No child needs thousands of dollars a month.


----------



## RebuildingMe (Aug 18, 2019)

oldshirt said:


> I wouldn’t put it quite like that.
> 
> My kids are both in their upper teens. I do not tell them not to ever marry.
> 
> ...





Al_Bundy said:


> No child needs thousands of dollars a month.


The people that came up with these formulas should be shot. 25% of my _gross_ salary for two kids? The more a man earns the more money the children (ex wife)get. So a raise for dad is an automatic raise for the kids (ex wife)? This is where I cannot recommend marriage for young men.


----------



## Al_Bundy (Mar 14, 2021)

RebuildingMe said:


> The people that came up with these formulas should be shot. 25% of my _gross_ salary for two kids? The more a man earns the more money the children (ex wife)get. So a raise for dad is an automatic raise for the kids (ex wife)? This is where I cannot recommend marriage for young men.


I know more than one guy who pays more than 50k a month to his worthless ex. Spoiler alert, the women don't have jobs.


----------



## frenchpaddy (May 31, 2021)

Al_Bundy said:


> I know more than one guy who pays more than 50k a month to his worthless ex. Spoiler alert, the women don't have jobs.


 is he the type guy that ends up with 22 year old model and he 70


----------



## Diana7 (Apr 19, 2016)

oldshirt said:


> I wouldn’t put it quite like that.
> 
> My kids are both in their upper teens. I do not tell them not to ever marry.
> 
> ...





Al_Bundy said:


> No child needs thousands of dollars a month.


They need a home which can be very expensive, as well as many other things as they grow.


----------



## Diana7 (Apr 19, 2016)

Al_Bundy said:


> I know more than one guy who pays more than 50k a month to his worthless ex. Spoiler alert, the women don't have jobs.


He must be very well off.


----------



## frenchpaddy (May 31, 2021)

Al_Bundy said:


> I know more than one guy who pays more than 50k a month to his worthless ex. Spoiler alert, the women don't have jobs.


 i hope he picks his workers better than he picks hiw wifes


----------



## oldshirt (Apr 1, 2017)

frenchpaddy said:


> i hope he picks his workers better than he picks hiw wifes


A good rule of thumb for both employees and domestic partners is - Hire slow, fire fast.


----------



## frenchpaddy (May 31, 2021)

oldshirt said:


> A good rule of thumb for both employees and domestic partners is - Hire slow, fire fast.


we have a saying a man hires a team like himself , also another is man without a smile should not open a shop , just to give you a third for the crack man who sh1t on weighbridge sh1t on big scales


----------



## oldshirt (Apr 1, 2017)

Diana7 said:


> The children's needs should always be paramount.


The problem men have though is often times the money is not going to the kids - it is going into the Ex W's shoe and handbag collection. 

And then if he has to pay spousal support on top of that, then it simply makes no sense. Able bodied adults should not have to pay for other able bodied adults. At least not for years on end. 

The devil is in the details and there are places and times for everything. 

I get it, if some guy is a brain surgeon or corporate CEO making millions and his wife has been a SAHM for years without any marketable job skills and a multi-year gap in her employment history, then sure, she can be supported for a period of time until she gets some job training and get on her own two feet............ but set up for life?? Just no. Especially if she was the one that wanted the divorce because she wanted to "find herself." 

Same with child support, the custody default is becoming more and more 50/50 across the land. If both parents are sharing physical custody and having the kids in their home, then why are men being stuck with thousands upon thousands in child support a month when 50% of the time they are already under his roof and under his care???

I'm not saying that children shouldn't be supported,, I'm not saying that at all. If some guy tosses out his wife and kids and wants nothing more to do with any of them so he can go chase young girls, then fine, let him write out some monthly checks to at least put some food on their table and clothes on their back. For guys like that, it's probably worth it to them to have them out from under foot. 

But most normal, decent guys want to remain with their kids and if the kids are under their care in their home 50% of the time, they why are they being shackled with thousands of dollars a month in CS in addition to the 50% in-home care they are already doing? That extra money is not going into the kids, it's going into the ex W's pocket.


----------



## Diana7 (Apr 19, 2016)

oldshirt said:


> The problem men have though is often times the money is not going to the kids - it is going into the Ex W's shoe and handbag collection.
> 
> And then if he has to pay spousal support on top of that, then it simply makes no sense. Able bodied adults should not have to pay for other able bodied adults. At least not for years on end.
> 
> ...


I honestly don't know anyone who was supported long after their divorce, and very few who had any spousal support at all. Most single mum's including myself before I remarried were struggling and certainly weren't buying any luxury goods for themselves or anything for themselves come to that. 
Maybe that happens in circles where there is lots of money, not in people I mix with.


----------



## oldshirt (Apr 1, 2017)

hamadryad said:


> Thankfully a lot of these antiquated laws are starting to be thrown away...Like lifetime alimony...Ridiculous...
> 
> Most of the bookkeepers that worked for me over the years were women that were either SAHM or just worked out of their houses...And we have seen over the past few years how many careers will let you work from home....
> 
> At the end of the day, women should no longer consider a marriage as a way to a lifetime of financial security and guys should approach it from the standpoint of protection in the event(or likelihood) that it will end..I think we are seeing a pretty radical shift, anyway....I still believe women love the idea of the marriage, the dress, the parties, the attention, etc, but guys aren't jumping at this anymore...The rates of marriage have significantly plunged..And women will be making more than a lot of men on average in my lifetime anyway...


A lot of the antiquated laws and practices are from our grandparents era where women traditionally did not pursue post-secondary education or job training and rarely had any kind of specialized employment once they married. 

Additionally on social scale if a woman woman was divorced or abandoned, she was often viewed with shame or as some kind of tainted woman that was permanently off of the marriage market. 

Most of the divorces that occurred within the common socio-economic classes in our grandparents and beyond times were men abandoning their wives and children to chase younger women or to chase booze. Another segment of divorces were in cases of the women leaving under extreme spousal and child abuse (and by extreme I mean multiple hospitalizations, disfigurements, potentially fatal etc) 

So there was an undercurrent of social and legal scorn towards the men along with an undercurrent of society wanting to "punish" men for the failure of the marriage and for essentially tossing these women and their children out into the street with no means of supporting themselves at that time. 

But times are a change'n. We have a completely different economic structure and a completely different employment structure and completely different social structure today. 

Women are achieving higher rates of education today. There are no longer distinctions between "Male jobs" and "female jobs". Some careers may still have more members of one gender over the other, but there are no actual laws or official restrictions on gender as there were 50 years ago. A woman is just as capable of acquiring education and employment today as a man. 

And socially, divorced and abandoned women are no longer social outcasts and are no longer stricken from the dating/marriage market. In fact if a woman that is not fat announces her upcoming divorce, there are often several men doing the "Pick Me!" Dance immediately. The majority of divorced women do remarry today. 

The actual divorce laws and divorce court practices may be a little slow in catching up, but like all things they too are adapting. 

Most states are no-fault where it doesn't matter who did what and no official preference is given regardless of who says the other did them wrong. And even in at-fault states, by the time everything comes out in the wash, it doesn't really make much real difference who did what. 

50/50 custody is often a default today unless one parent is shown to be unfit. 

As women's education and average wages and salaries increase, there are women that are now being ordered to pay child and in some circumstances even spousal support. 

But even with all of that, there is still a bias against men to a degree. Melinda Gates and Mackenzie Bezos are now probably a couple of the richest single females on the planet and what did they do to make those billions?? Attend luncheons and corporate events and smile pretty??


----------



## RebuildingMe (Aug 18, 2019)

Diana7 said:


> They need a home which can be very expensive, as well as many other things as they grow.


Sure, but who cares was the father needs, right? As long as mommy and babies are taken care of.


----------



## Diana7 (Apr 19, 2016)

RebuildingMe said:


> Sure, but who cares was the father needs, right? As long as mommy and babies are taken care of.


My solicitor told me that any judges priority concern will always be the dependant children, as it should be. Why should they suffer for what their parents have done?


----------



## oldshirt (Apr 1, 2017)

Diana7 said:


> I honestly don't know anyone who was supported long after their divorce, and very few who had any spousal support at all. Most single mum's including myself before I remarried were struggling and certainly weren't buying any luxury goods for themselves or anything for themselves come to that.
> Maybe that happens in circles where there is lots of money, not in people I mix with.


My guess is you are in a higher socio economic class than I am. 

"Struggling" is a very subjective word. Many of the single moms I have known over the years have used their child support on beer and cigarettes and drugs etc.


----------



## oldshirt (Apr 1, 2017)

Diana7 said:


> My solicitor told me that any judges priority concern will always be the dependant children, as it should be. Why should they suffer for what their parents have done?


The judges duty is not really to the children per se. The judges duty is to the law and to The People of that jurisdiction. 

The purpose of the court is to divide the legal assets and assure that the children are provided for to the degree that they do not become wards of the state or to require public assistance if at all possible. 

The court's job is to protect The People. As such, there can't be children starving in the street, public assistance is to be avoided if at all possible and the lawyers and the court have an obligation to try to keep people OUT of court as much as possible there for there is incentive to try to divide the assets as reasonably fair as possible in effort to keep people from coming back and tying the court up even more. 

Are judges human beings and want to keep kids from going hungry? yes, of course. But the court's primary duty is to uphold the law and serve The People.


----------



## RebuildingMe (Aug 18, 2019)

oldshirt said:


> The judges duty is not really to the children per se. The judges duty is to the law and to The People of that jurisdiction.
> 
> The purpose of the court is to divide the legal assets and assure that the children are provided for to the degree that they do not become wards of the state or to require public assistance if at all possible.
> 
> ...


I agree. But currently, the laws and the formulas are squarely to benefit the mom (who is granted custody 80% of the time) at dad’s expense. Mom can use the kids money to buy alcohol and cigarettes, if she so chooses. Until the laws and formulas are re-written, I cannot endorse marriage. In fact, I will council my children against it.


----------



## oldshirt (Apr 1, 2017)

RebuildingMe said:


> Sure, but who cares was the father needs, right? As long as mommy and babies are taken care of.


Here's where I have an issue with how men vs women are treated by the courts. As men, we are assumed to be able to fend for ourselves and be at minimum of self supportive at all times and preferably supportive of a home and family. 

In days of yore where women were considered property and chattel and were denied education and outside employment and were considered pariahs if they were abandoned or divorced, Women in those times were often under the care of their parents until they were a marriagable age and were then passed on to their husbands. There were rarely independent, self-supporting , single adult women in those times. So I can understand legal constructs that were geared towards their support in the event they were tossed out into the street by their husbands back then. 

But in this day and age, women have equal educational and employment opportunities. They are not socially condemned or outcast in the event of divorce. They are also expected to obtain employment and be self supportive as adults. And they initiate from 70-80% of the divorces. 

So why are they being given indefinate or prolonged spousal support at all? 

If a guy was a SAHF and he decided he didn't want to be married anymore and filed for divorce, he would be expected to get out and get a damn job. He wouldn't be given any spousal support by any but the most liberal and bleeding heart judge. 

If an adult, single women is expected to be employed and be self-supporting as a single adult, Why are they expecting to be supported following a divorce (especially one that she statistically initiated)


----------



## BigDaddyNY (May 19, 2021)

I read an article that said something like 15,000 men in the US receive spousal support while almost 400,000 women receive it. That is in spite of the fact that women are the top breadwinner in 40% of households. Something doesn't seem very fair.


----------



## Al_Bundy (Mar 14, 2021)

RebuildingMe said:


> Sure, but who cares was the father needs, right? As long as mommy and babies are taken care of.


Just look at the posts blaming the guys for picking wrong. Not the system, that's working fine folks, nothing to see here.


----------



## Al_Bundy (Mar 14, 2021)

Al_Bundy said:


> I know more than one guy who pays more than 50k a month to his worthless ex. Spoiler alert, the women don't have jobs.


Quick note, my post should say over 50k a year in child support, not a month. To compare the median income for a man in the US is around 57k a year. An obscene amount by any measure.


----------



## frenchpaddy (May 31, 2021)

it is all very fine the talk about single adult supporting them self sounds good and fair inn a fair world , but first of all where I come from women still get paid over 20% less then men and even though it is against European Law and French law IT IS SLOW TO CHANGE and women can only go so high in their job ,
so because of this when a couple get married and all is good in the relationship the woman often makes the mistake to stay at home to mind the kids because child care costs and cost of second car and other costs + the tax benefit the husband can claim when all adds up the woman stays at home letting her husband the advantage in his job 
if she goes back into the work force 10 years after she is starting from the bottom again


----------



## Diana7 (Apr 19, 2016)

oldshirt said:


> My guess is you are in a higher socio economic class than I am.
> 
> "Struggling" is a very subjective word. Many of the single moms I have known over the years have used their child support on beer and cigarettes and drugs etc.


Not in my experience. For me personally struggling meant we had no holidays for 7 years, not able to afford to run a car, no new clothes, didn't smoke drink or take drugs, etc.


----------



## Diana7 (Apr 19, 2016)

Al_Bundy said:


> Quick note, my post should say over 50k a year in child support, not a month. To compare the median income for a man in the US is around 57k a year. An obscene amount by any measure.


It does depend on what he earns. Here it's worked out on earnings. The more earnings the more support. Also depends on the number of children. I received £400 a month for my youngest, that's £4,800 a year($6,800). Their dad wasn't a big earner. They lived with me.


----------



## Luckylucky (Dec 11, 2020)

What about the scenarios where a woman is loyal and devoted to her man, desires him, keeps a clean house, thanklessly raises children, husband insists she stay home and give up her job/career, while he treats her poorly? He cheats on her but won’t leave, reminds her that she’s not contributed financially every time he’s caught out. Won’t divorce her, won’t let her have another man because hey: he worked his butt off to let her sit at home?

She tries to be better, she also tries to leave, tries to get a job, but he makes it impossible - it’s my money! He treats her so badly, she keeps smiling through it, and she reaches her forties or fifties, the stress does make her sick along the way and she can’t keep up as well as she used to, but she still loves him. And eventually he leaves her for a younger model, who he will treat 10 times better than he treated her for the rest of his years. He’ll lavish her with the $$$$ that he came into the marriage with. 

Is that ok? It happens to so many women.


----------



## frenchpaddy (May 31, 2021)

Luckylucky said:


> What about the scenarios where a woman is loyal and devoted to her man, desires him, keeps a clean house, thanklessly raises children, husband insists she stay home and give up her job/career, while he treats her poorly? He cheats on her but won’t leave, reminds her that she’s not contributed financially every time he’s caught out. Won’t divorce her, won’t let her have another man because hey: he worked his butt off to let her sit at home?


we all know someone that is like the first part of this scenarios but my question is how can he stop her getting a divorce if the marriage has broken down , given that he is cheating , I like the wife might not have the proof of his cheating , some men are very good at hiding and we all know a man that started out with the woman above as simple employee and in love with wife as he gets older and grows higher in his job becomes very sexy to a young woman 

you see lock-down thought many people what living at home with their other half was relay like , before many couples lived 2 files they had their work life which was 8h or more a day plus add in travailing time dinner brake and in france that can be up to 2h , (gives the cheater enough time to play ) and went home house was clean food on the table and they sit down and look at the match , and the wife looked at a film on telly ,go to bed have sex all was good but did not they area asleep for the best part of 8h , he spends less time with the wife that with his work mates ,

many people married are strangers they think they know each other


----------



## Luckylucky (Dec 11, 2020)

I’m talking exactly about the above scenario I mentioned, you’ve changed it all around. It actually happens that these men don’t hide it and rub it in her face and make all manner of threats to stop her leaving. Overt and covert threats. Yes, he’s the good guy out there, the catch, the angel outside the home.

He finds every way to keep her married… lest she dare Tell The Truth about who he really is


----------



## frenchpaddy (May 31, 2021)

Luckylucky said:


> I’m talking exactly about the above scenario I mentioned, you’ve changed it all around. It actually happens that these men don’t hide it and rub it in her face and make all manner of threats to stop her leaving. Overt and covert threats. Yes, he’s the good guy out there, the catch, the angel outside the home.
> 
> He finds every way to keep her married… lest she dare Tell The Truth about who he really is


I FEEL THE PAIN OF THIS WOMAN . and not trying to change the scenario just not knowing the full details of what a pig this man is 
bad enough to be a cheater but to rub it in her face , it is like as if he is cheating not for the time spent with his other women 
but more to have another nail to poke his wife with , 
as I don't know the 
scenario/ case 
I can only imagine so can you help me understand why she is not gone tonight when he gets home and why she is not building a case and talking to legal team ,

I helped a woman once that was married to a drunk that beat her when drunk but the best lover any could be when not drinking 
the would drink 2 bottles of bourbon one night a week she was going to stay with him until the kids went to uni but the kids were 8 and 10
I got her to go to the people that can help her and what did she do 
she turned it all around on me and told her friends that I was only trying to get inside her knickers even though i am married 
never looked at another woman in my life and was manipulated by him and maybe by the 2
he would call me when the drinking would start and ask me to come help him as he was going to hang himself , what he wanted was a fool to come and be bodygard for his wife when he would be on the second bottle and start to get violent

so what hold has your the pig got over this woman , do you think she has a good house and he has a good wage and she is afraid to take a step into the dark and does not want to go live in a cheap flat or is she like my woman staying for the get the best for the kids , my woman is still with him and the 8 year old in now 19 but I have not seen that woman in the last 10 years so I don't know if she still has the odd black eye even though they live in the same area


----------



## hamadryad (Aug 30, 2020)

Luckylucky said:


> What about the scenarios where a woman is loyal and devoted to her man, desires him, keeps a clean house, thanklessly raises children, husband insists she stay home and give up her job/career, while he treats her poorly? He cheats on her but won’t leave, reminds her that she’s not contributed financially every time he’s caught out. Won’t divorce her, won’t let her have another man because hey: he worked his butt off to let her sit at home?
> 
> She tries to be better, she also tries to leave, tries to get a job, but he makes it impossible - it’s my money! He treats her so badly, she keeps smiling through it, and she reaches her forties or fifties, the stress does make her sick along the way and she can’t keep up as well as she used to, but she still loves him. And eventually he leaves her for a younger model, who he will treat 10 times better than he treated her for the rest of his years. He’ll lavish her with the $$$$ that he came into the marriage with.
> 
> Is that ok? It happens to so many women.


My mom left....with nothing....at 21 years old.. with kids.. and a lot less of resources and benefits available to women today, because of a lot of things you are pointing out...Didn't even have a drivers license...Tough? sure....but she did it...

I am sympathetic, but at the same time this is not slavery...If they think that being abused and talked down to should still be rewarded with love, then there is something wrong with those women..

A lot of women, unknowingly think that stuff you mentioned(keep a nice house, children, a pair of tits and a vagina, etc) should be enough for a lifetime of service from a donkey of a man that should just work, accept the shytty tie on Father's Day, and never complain or question what she does or anything else...The truth is a lot of guys would be loyal and loving/caring if their wives didn't stop taking care of themselves the minute the honeymoon was paid for...I am not referring to you or anyone else in the thread, just stuff I have experienced over time...

The bottom line is this....NO ONE should think that they have someone's devotion and love for life because of a piece of paper...People change, People make the wrong choices, whatever...Man or woman....Why does this have to be like some sort of a trap? This shouldn't be like a Mafia induction where "once you are in, you can never leave"....


----------



## Luckylucky (Dec 11, 2020)

Again @hamadryad I’ve posted the opposite scenario and twice a man has replied and talked about a woman unlike the woman I’m taking about. Read loyal, loving, devoted, she desires him. She’s not just tits and vagina, she’s the package. Yes she works out and looks good too. She’s not whipping the donkey, she’s not even nagging. She’s not even buying clothes that match her husband’s income. She’s earning her keep in every way and grateful for his hard work and wouldn’t ever call him a donkey. 

Yes if she does leave she gets the govt. housing when she’s 50, or when she’s dumped. And she won’t complain then either. How employable really, is a woman at this age? Really truly, when you’ve had 20 years at home, you’re not that employable.

But twice it’s been turned into something else, another type of woman who’s dishing out Shyte. Maybe she tried sometimes to have boundaries! Twice it’s turned into their own story about someone else, some other woman. (This is not my marriage story, but very very close to home, a few times over).


----------



## hamadryad (Aug 30, 2020)

Luckylucky said:


> Again @hamadryad I’ve posted the opposite scenario and twice a man has replied and talked about a woman unlike the woman I’m taking about. Read loyal, loving, devoted, she desires him. She’s not just tits and vagina, she’s the package. Yes she works out and looks good too.
> 
> But twice it’s been turned into something else, their own story about someone else. (This is not my marriage story, but very very close to home).


I get it....

I mean, sure...there are some sociopaths in this world, but they are rare....The way some women talk, though, they couldn't do anything wrong and all these guys are sociopaths and narcissists.. Not buying it.....These women were all perfect, blah, blah....And the reality is that maybe they were in fact "perfect", just not for that guy...I am hard to get along with at times, but the people that I click with will tell you that I am the "whole package" as well...The others will probably tell you that I am a jerk or an a hole...lol. See how that works??

The "package" is your interpretation, and obviously not his...For whatever reasons, he didn't think she was such a package any more...


----------



## frenchpaddy (May 31, 2021)

been someone punching bag even if he does not put a hand on her , the woman in your story is a door mat , 


Luckylucky said:


> Again @hamadryad I’ve posted the opposite scenario and twice a man has replied and talked about a woman unlike the woman I’m taking about. Read loyal, loving, devoted, she desires him. She’s not just tits and vagina, she’s the package. Yes she works out and looks good too. She’s not whipping the donkey, she’s not even nagging. She’s not even buying clothes that match her husband’s income. She’s earning her keep in every way and grateful for his hard work and wouldn’t ever call him a donkey.
> 
> Yes if she does leave she gets the govt. housing when she’s 50, or when she’s dumped. And she won’t complain then either. How employable really, is a woman at this age? Really truly, when you’ve had 20 years at home, you’re not that employable.
> 
> But twice it’s been turned into something else, another type of woman who’s dishing out Shyte. Maybe she tried sometimes to have boundaries! Twice it’s turned into their own story about someone else, some other woman. (This is not my marriage story, but very very close to home, a few times over).


----------



## Luckylucky (Dec 11, 2020)

hamadryad said:


> I get it....
> 
> I mean, sure...there are some sociopaths in this world, but they are rare....The way some women talk, though, they couldn't do anything wrong and all these guys are sociopaths and narcissists.. Not buying it.....These women were all perfect, blah, blah....And the reality is that maybe they were in fact "perfect", just not for that guy...I am hard to get along with at times, but the people that I click with will tell you that I am the "whole package" as well...The others will probably tell you that I am a jerk or an a hole...lol. See how that works??
> 
> The "package" is your interpretation, and obviously not his...For whatever reasons, he didn't think she was such a package any more...


Yes four wives later, none of them were the package, but he was ‘the package’ as he loved to say, my old sagging uncle. No truly, those women were living breathing dolls with a heart, he knew they were the package but no-one could be a bigger package than him. He wasn’t a sociopath, they didn’t label him so, I didn’t label him so. All 4 women very happy, some remarried. He was always on about his darn money being his and how they mooched him. Knowing what a catch they were he liked to keep them very much away from other men and it got dangerous for one of them when she was dumped.

Ironically, eventually it was him that ended up almost homeless.


----------



## Luckylucky (Dec 11, 2020)

Remember also, that just because a man works, it doesn’t make him god-like or the package or give him the right to hold that over a woman’s head her entire life. Having a D— isn’t a weapon either, especially if you’re going to be bitter about it later.

My uncle didn’t like them working, it made him look bad (plus they’d be seeing other men) and god forbid his children were looked after by others.

The last two wives he didn’t lay a hand on, incidentally, he did things very differently. Wife 3 left after 6 months (got a whopping European holiday out of him!) and wife 4 left after a year, he didn’t hit her either, but he didn’t like her studying or wearing makeup or sleeping with the new baby who just wouldn’t shut up (his words). She did all she could so he could sleep enough to work, but out as soon as she saw what he was.

Are you both divorced and angry they took your money or am I way off? I assume the exes are very happy and will be happy always? Am I wrong? Apologies if I’m wrong and I mean no ill. There really are different stories and good women out there who are left behind.


----------



## oldshirt (Apr 1, 2017)

frenchpaddy said:


> it is all very fine the talk about single adult supporting them self sounds good and fair inn a fair world , but first of all where I come from women still get paid over 20% less then men and even though it is against European Law and French law IT IS SLOW TO CHANGE and women can only go so high in their job ,


Any time you see statistics about women making less, you need to look at it with a critical eye and consider what is really being compared. 

If women really made 20% less than men for the same job and the same hours worked, then employers would only hire women. Why would they even hire men in the first place if they had to pay them 20% more??? 

Look at how the statistics are being obtained. Are they polling a random group of men against a random group of women. 

If they are polling a group or women that are largely made up of part time waitresses and secretaries and retail clerks and comparing them to a group of fulltime male steamfitters and heavy steelworkers that are often forced into overtime, then yes there is going to be a disparity in income. 

You have to compare female steamfitters to male steamfitters both working 60+ hours a week and compare male waiters working 25 hours a week to female waitresses working 25 hours a week. 

My guess is the disparity will be quite small when comparing apples to apples.


----------



## BigDaddyNY (May 19, 2021)

Luckylucky said:


> What about the scenarios where a woman is loyal and devoted to her man, desires him, keeps a clean house, thanklessly raises children, husband insists she stay home and give up her job/career, while he treats her poorly? He cheats on her but won’t leave, reminds her that she’s not contributed financially every time he’s caught out. Won’t divorce her, won’t let her have another man because hey: he worked his butt off to let her sit at home?
> 
> She tries to be better, she also tries to leave, tries to get a job, but he makes it impossible - it’s my money! He treats her so badly, she keeps smiling through it, and she reaches her forties or fifties, the stress does make her sick along the way and she can’t keep up as well as she used to, but she still loves him. And eventually he leaves her for a younger model, who he will treat 10 times better than he treated her for the rest of his years. He’ll lavish her with the $$$$ that he came into the marriage with.
> 
> Is that ok? It happens to so many women.


Its absolutely not okay. Even though I think the system is biased against men, I think it is trying to make the best of a bad situation. You probably won't hear your scenario played out with genders reversed. This may happen to a man from time to time, but as you said, it mostly happens to women and they should be protected and taken care of. They devoted their life to a career too, just not one that earned a paycheck. It doesn't change the value of it though.


----------



## Al_Bundy (Mar 14, 2021)

Diana7 said:


> It does depend on what he earns. Here it's worked out on earnings. The more earnings the more support. Also depends on the number of children. I received £400 a month for my youngest, that's £4,800 a year($6,800). Their dad wasn't a big earner. They lived with me.


Same here and the formula is total trash. I don't care how much the guy makes, the wife should not get a tax free livable wage off just child support. Especially where custody is supposed to be 50/50. Plus if you did it on 400gbp a month, then why does Sara down the road need 2000 a month? I'd argue she doesn't. Her kids aren't better than yours.


----------



## Rob_1 (Sep 8, 2017)

boonez40 said:


> Thats the price you pay for your ethics and morals.
> 
> A man has one thing in this life, and that is his word. Once you break your word, you have nothing else to offer. I have always tried to keep my word.
> 
> ...


I think that you're speaking through the eyes of an abuse individual that has been conditioned to bend over an accept his lot no matter which way the wind is blowing.

No. Absolutely not..you do not have to take it. You do not have to accept the notion that you "must" save a marriage/relationship at all cost. You can absolutely divorce and be there always for your kids. In today's society divorce can be a blessing to the kids where there's so much abuse, shouting, disrespect by both or one of the parent to the other. Children are better off in two happy homes than in a miserable one.

" *My daughter does not know and she never has to know that I did not create her*." This statement is so wrong. Dude, your daughter HAS all the rights to know about her heritage, whatever that might be. Who are you to deny her that knowledge? it's not only because she has a right to know, but also for health reasons that someday it might come to light. How do you think your daughter will feel knowing that she was lied to all her life by the people she's suppose to trust the most? She could also have siblings, relatives that doesn't know about it and would want to know.

I think some of your view in life are skewed and set in stone. That might come and bite you badly sometime in your life.


----------



## frenchpaddy (May 31, 2021)

true even from a family illness point , and it has happened a child finds out when an illness hits them or another close ,


----------



## boonez40 (Jun 11, 2021)

Rob_1 said:


> I think that you're speaking through the eyes of an abuse individual that has been conditioned to bend over an accept his lot no matter which way the wind is blowing.
> 
> No. Absolutely not..you do not have to take it. You do not have to accept the notion that you "must" save a marriage/relationship at all cost. You can absolutely divorce and be there always for your kids. In today's society divorce can be a blessing to the kids where there's so much abuse, shouting, disrespect by both or one of the parent to the other. Children are better off in two happy homes than in a miserable one.
> 
> ...


Jesus christ you are dumb to think I would tell my daughter that her real father did not want her and that he wanted her dead. 

Let me tell you this, Right to Know
My first wife used to tell our youngest daughter all the time she never wanted her and thought about aborting her. My daughter now has issues. 

Of all the stupid ideas you people have, this one is the worst. 

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk


----------



## Torninhalf (Nov 4, 2018)

boonez40 said:


> Jesus christ you are dumb to think I would tell my daughter that her real father did not want her and that he wanted her dead.
> 
> Let me tell you this, Right to Know
> My first wife used to tell our youngest daughter all the time she never wanted her and thought about aborting her. My daughter now has issues.
> ...


Easy there! You don’t have to tell your daughter that her real father wanted her dead…what you do have to do is tell her that she is yours by adoption. You don’t have a right to keep that from her. It’s the truth and she needs to be told at some point.


----------



## BigDaddyNY (May 19, 2021)

boonez40 said:


> Jesus christ you are dumb to think I would tell my daughter that her real father did not want her and that he wanted her dead.
> 
> Let me tell you this, Right to Know
> My first wife used to tell our youngest daughter all the time she never wanted her and thought about aborting her. My daughter now has issues.
> ...


Are you stupid or something? He didn't say tell your daughter he wished she were dead. He said she should know that you aren't her biological father. You can do that in a loving supportive way, as her Dad should do.


----------



## Rob_1 (Sep 8, 2017)

boonez40 said:


> Jesus christ you are dumb to think I would tell my daughter that her real father did not want her and that he wanted her dead.
> 
> Let me tell you this, Right to Know
> My first wife used to tell our youngest daughter all the time she never wanted her and thought about aborting her. My daughter now has issues.
> ...


Now..who's being stupid here? You're coming through as someone somehow damaged by whatever you had to endure in life, but now you're too obtuse to understand reality from ideals.
Where the heck did I say that you need to disclose all the gory details of her birth? Where did I say that? Show me. 

I say that she has a right to know about her heritage, for so many reasons that are clear to everyone EXCEPT YOU. man, you really need a dose of reality. All you're doing here is justifying things that do not need justification. Got it?


----------



## boonez40 (Jun 11, 2021)

Rob_1 said:


> Now..who's being stupid here? You're coming through as someone somehow damaged by whatever you had to endure in life, but now you're too obtuse to understand reality from ideals.
> Where the heck did I say that you need to disclose all the gory details of her birth? Where did I say that? Show me.
> 
> I say that she has a right to know about her heritage, for so many reasons that are clear to everyone EXCEPT YOU. man, you really need a dose of reality. All you're doing here is justifying things that do not need justification. Got it?


Where did you say i didn't have to disclose this part of the information. Don't try to rationalize your ignorant comment with me. I do not work that way. 
There is a difference you need to recognize, your not my wife and I am not the one. 

But no hard feelings, I am not pissed. Everything can be remedied by a track hoe and a 20 foot deep hole. 

When she turns 18 and if the time is right we will have that discussion but at 7 years old, no we are not going down that rabbit hole. As a child she will never have to know unless it has to be known is what I should have said. 

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk


----------



## Rob_1 (Sep 8, 2017)

boonez40 said:


> Where did you say i didn't have to disclose this part of the information. Don't try to rationalize your ignorant comment with me. I do not work that way.
> There is a difference you need to recognize, your not my wife and I am not the one.
> 
> But no hard feelings, I am not pissed. Everything can be remedied by a track hoe and a 20 foot deep hole.
> ...


Instead of babbling stuff that makes no sense you should get together with your wife and consult a professional that can guide you correctly as to when and how you need to disclose to your daughter her parentage.
Moreover you continue to put words to my mouth that were not spoken. Stop that. I never say to disclose to your daughter now, just that she needs to know. When and how mutual consent between you and your wife guided by a professional in the field is what will eventually needs to happens. But it's my understanding that is better when younger rather than older. Plus I have some experience on this. I have a relative and a friend that went through it, both guided by professional child psychologists. Both disclosed when the child was younger, rather than older.


----------



## Torninhalf (Nov 4, 2018)

boonez40 said:


> Where did you say i didn't have to disclose this part of the information. Don't try to rationalize your ignorant comment with me. I do not work that way.
> There is a difference you need to recognize, your not my wife and I am not the one.
> 
> But no hard feelings, I am not pissed. Everything can be remedied by a track hoe and a 20 foot deep hole.
> ...


A track hoe and a 20 foot deep hole? What does that mean? 😂🤷🏼‍♀️😂


----------



## frenchpaddy (May 31, 2021)

Torninhalf said:


> A track hoe and a 20 foot deep hole? What does that mean? 😂🤷🏼‍♀️😂


 i think he is talking about digging a hole with an excavator , lol


----------



## Torninhalf (Nov 4, 2018)

frenchpaddy said:


> i think he is talking about digging a hole with an excavator , lol


😂


----------



## Torninhalf (Nov 4, 2018)

frenchpaddy said:


> i think he is talking about digging a hole with an excavator , lol


Probably takes about 4 hours. 😳🤷🏼‍♀️


----------



## frenchpaddy (May 31, 2021)

why you think he is big lol


Torninhalf said:


> Probably takes about 4 hours. 😳🤷🏼‍♀️


----------



## musiclover (Apr 26, 2017)

Wee we egg get


----------



## boonez40 (Jun 11, 2021)

Rob_1 said:


> Instead of babbling stuff that makes no sense you should get together with your wife and consult a professional that can guide you correctly as to when and how you need to disclose to your daughter her parentage.
> Moreover you continue to put words to my mouth that were not spoken. Stop that. I never say to disclose to your daughter now, just that she needs to know. When and how mutual consent between you and your wife guided by a professional in the field is what will eventually needs to happens. But it's my understanding that is better when younger rather than older. Plus I have some experience on this. I have a relative and a friend that went through it, both guided by professional child psychologists. Both disclosed when the child was younger, rather than older.


Actually I am glad you brought up the subject of experience. In reality, you do not have any experience with this matter. So you shouldn't be giving anyone any advice on how to handle their own children. All because you stayed at a Holiday Inn once, doesn't make you an expert on the effects this will have on my child both short term nor long term. That is something my wife and I will decide . Your info and advice was not warranted and wasn't solicited. You stuck your nose where it did not belong and gave me your opinion that I never asked for. 

I babbled back at you for a reason, you apparently was not smart enough to take the hint and still try to force your thoughts and feelings upon me. You further try to justify your opinion by saying you have experience that has no merit, again staying at a Holiday Inn is not the same is being there first hand and living with the consequence as I have in respect to what my ex wife did to our daughter who is now 21. These are long term consequences that I deal with ever day. 

Now please respect me, shut up about it and move on. This is not up for discussion and I do not need your advice. This is as nice as I am going to be about. 

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk


----------



## boonez40 (Jun 11, 2021)

Torninhalf said:


> Probably takes about 4 hours.


Depends not on how deep I am going but rather the circumference and rather if the center has to be back dragged to the edge before it is expelled from the hole. 

I assume everyone knows and has either used or owned a hoe. A Track Hoe is an Excavator and an Excavator is a Track Hoe. A Hand Hoe is also an Excavator as well. As well as the Maiden Ho, she will excavate your wallet. 

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk


----------



## Rob_1 (Sep 8, 2017)

boonez40 said:


> . All because you stayed at a Holiday Inn once


How dare you said I stayed at the Holiday Inn. I always stay at the Hilton.


----------



## boonez40 (Jun 11, 2021)

Rob_1 said:


> How dare you said I stayed at the Holiday Inn. I always stay at the Hilton.


Lmao no comment on the Hilton, don't think I have ever been to one. 

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk


----------



## DTO (Dec 18, 2011)

It depends greatly on the situation. Like was written earlier, someone who sacrifices their career to raise a family deserves assets and alimony. Someone like my ex, who worked for spending money and refused to advance in her career as I had - not so much.

The problem is that many of these circumstances are unproveable and may be subjective. How, for instance, would I prove that my ex did not help support the family in a sufficient manner?

The only way to keep divorce from being even less cumbersome and time consuming is to have rules and formulas to put objectivity into the process. Yes they can yield unfair results, but that's all we have. 

Definitely, if I remarry I will get a prenuptial. I don't have what I feel is a ton of assets, but it's a lot to me and I don't intend to live modestly if things go bad. I already had to give up much the first time and am too old build myself up a third time.


----------



## DTO (Dec 18, 2011)

Diana7 said:


> I would never give them that advise.


Agreed. I do tell my daughter, however, to be able to support herself well before getting attached or married.


----------



## Rowan (Apr 3, 2012)

When I divorced, I paid my serial-cheating ex-husband $30K to accept 50/50 custody of our son. He wanted 1 weekend per month (Saturday through Sunday noon only). So I was essentially bribing him to spend _more_ time with his son.

At the time, he was making $180K a year to my ~$50K. I did not ask for, nor receive, any spousal support. I also insisted that every red cent of the state-calculated minimum of child support he owed go directly into a college fund for our son - that could not be touched except to pay college expenses. That money never even hit my accounts, moving seamlessly from his paycheck to the college fund via direct deposit. I'm the one who had my attorney write that into the settlement. 

So no handbag and shoe shopping sprees here. I was barely squeaking by paying our bills and the mortgage on the house I'd bought (he kept the marital home). 

Our son is 21 now and his father has not paid a dime in child support since the day he turned 18, even though he was still 3 months from graduating high school. My ex-husband has also not paid a dime out of pocket towards our son's university education. Everything has been paid from the college fund or out of pocket by me. 

Dude is _still_ kvetching about how badly he got screwed over in the divorce.......


----------



## Diana7 (Apr 19, 2016)

DTO said:


> Agreed. I do tell my daughter, however, to be able to support herself well before getting attached or married.


I just let them make their own decisions and they have done fine.


----------



## DTO (Dec 18, 2011)

Diana7 said:


> It does depend on what he earns. Here it's worked out on earnings. The more earnings the more support. Also depends on the number of children. I received £400 a month for my youngest, that's £4,800 a year($6,800). Their dad wasn't a big earner. They lived with me.


I favor sizable child support if the kids live with you. Frankly, you need to house them and what not, they don't need a bunch of space if they are with their dad a few days per month.

The problem I have is the child support payments for parents with equal custody. I have one child with 50% custody. I played around with my state's (California, in the U.S.) CS calculator. I would owe my ex $600 per month this year and $700 a month next year based on our incomes.

And, note that my state accounts for mortgage costs. Those amounts allow for my mortgage being twice the size of hers. Does it really cost $300 a week to feed and clothe one child? 

How is that fair? Naturally, there is a sizeable income gap, but that was due to her not building a career; she fell into a full-time job at 18 and hasn't really built on it (even after 30 years). Why should I be compelled to subsidize her lack of effort?


----------



## Diana7 (Apr 19, 2016)

DTO said:


> I favor sizable child support if the kids live with you. Frankly, you need to house them and what not, they don't need a bunch of space if they are with their dad a few days per month.
> 
> The problem I have is the child support payments for parents with equal custody. I have one child with 50% custody. I played around with my state's (California, in the U.S.) CS calculator. I would owe my ex $600 per month this year and $700 a month next year based on our incomes.
> 
> ...


It's not just feeding and clothing though. It's the household costs, electricity, water, heating, school trips, pocket money, hobbies etc. Lots of hidden expenses.


----------



## RebuildingMe (Aug 18, 2019)

Diana7 said:


> It's not just feeding and clothing though. It's the household costs, electricity, water, heating, school trips, pocket money, hobbies etc. Lots of hidden expenses.


Thankfully you are not the judge at my trial. Your thoughts are antiquated and time warped from 40 years ago.


----------



## oldshirt (Apr 1, 2017)

Diana7 said:


> It's not just feeding and clothing though. It's the household costs, electricity, water, heating, school trips, pocket money, hobbies etc. Lots of hidden expenses.


....That an adult would have to pay for that stuff anyway even if they did not have any kids.


----------



## DTO (Dec 18, 2011)

Diana7 said:


> It's not just feeding and clothing though. It's the household costs, electricity, water, heating, school trips, pocket money, hobbies etc. Lots of hidden expenses.


I've always run the household, so I know full well there are lots of costs. But you can keep that under $300 a week with a little restraint - she's been with me 100% for three years so I'd know. Many expenses (mortgage, utilities) don't change much if at all with another person at home.

But, let's say those do add up to $300 weekly. With 50% custody I would have needed to provide those for the time she's with me as well. That being the case, you've made my point. I'd wind up paying substantially all of the costs of upbringing my kid. That is unconscionable. How can anyone with a decent job get away with paying little or nothing in the maintenance of their own child?

ETA: You could argue less CS means my ex would have to sacrifice to support our kid. I'm fine with that. She was not a SAHM, she chose to not invest in her career. She had this job over 5 years before we had a child - more than enough time to get a degree. I should live a better lifestyle than her - that's the payoff for investing in myself.


----------



## Diana7 (Apr 19, 2016)

RebuildingMe said:


> Thankfully you are not the judge at my trial. Your thoughts are antiquated and time warped from 40 years ago.


I was a single mum of three, I understand how much it costs.


----------



## Diana7 (Apr 19, 2016)

oldshirt said:


> ....That an adult would have to pay for that stuff anyway even if they did not have any kids.


The more people in a household the higher the bills. If you don't have a child or children you can have a smaller place, less bills, lower mortgage, smaller car etc.


----------



## drencrom (Jul 1, 2021)

RebuildingMe said:


> My STBX has a good career, makes slightly more than I do, and always professed throughout our marriage that she was a strong independent woman that didn’t need any money from anyone. Yet here we are 8 days into trial because she wants $2000/month in child support even though we may have the kids equal time. Don’t I have a mortgage to pay for and a house to run with utility bills?
> 
> My point is, as anyone knows after going through a divorce, people change their tune and usually go for the jugular.


Ah yes, desire for equality is always selective.


----------



## drencrom (Jul 1, 2021)

Al_Bundy said:


> She will probably tell everyone how she doesn't need a man as she takes your money. As long as the court system continues to prop up one party at the expense of the other this will never change. The worst part is they hide behind the old "best for the children" line.


Or the best one, which I have heard my X sling around town, is that I don't pay enough for my kids.

So I drew up a spreadsheet that calculated my son's portion of the mortgage, property taxes, utilities, household grocery bill, school expenses(which she doesn't pay because she got them waived), clothing(even considering buying him $2000 worth of clothes each year which she doesn't do) extra curricular expenses....basically ALL of what it costs to pay for his needs and wants. 

And it shows that she still would have a few grand left over each year if she used the child support for him. And that isn't even taking into account that she has a financial responsibility to him as well. Child support isn't meant to cover everything since both parents have that responsibility.

However I gave her a copy of it and that shut her up, especially after I told her I'd give a copy to anyone that came to me saying she was badmouthing me.


----------

