Home › Forums › MGTOW Central › If Marriage were a proper legal contract…
This topic contains 18 replies, has 9 voices, and was last updated by 
The Deal 2 years, 4 months ago.
- AuthorPosts
We all know about the legal system(s) being a complete disgrace when it comes to divorce and so ridiculously biased as to generate a significant amount of red pill issues.
I review and assess legal contracts on a fairly regular basis (not a lawyer but as part of engineering projects) and I’ve seen the term marriage contract banded about which got me thinking – what if marriage were a proper legal contract and treated as such – what would be the issues?
There should be proper termination clauses included for breach of contract, failure to deliver, unsatisfactory performance etc. and limitation of liability.
Traditional wedding vow (Church of England):
I, (name) , take you, (name) , to be my lawfully wedded husband/wife, my constant friend, my faithful partner and my love from this day forward. In the presence of God, our family and friends, I offer you my solemn vow to be your faithful partner in sickness and in health, in good times and in bad, and in joy as well as in sorrow. I promise to love you unconditionally, to support you in your goals, to honour and respect you, to laugh with you and cry with you, and to cherish you for as long as we both shall live.”
“my faithful partner” – breach of contract if unfaithful.
“my love from this day forward” – fraud? Gaining monies by deception?
“… to be your faithful partner in sickness and in health” – again, breach of contract.
“I promise to love you unconditionally” – breach of contract and fraud? Failure on performance/delivery resulting in termination?
“to support you in your goals” – breach of contract and failure on performance/delivery
“to honour and respect you” – I’ve just nearly been sick writing this one. Again, fraud and breach of contract?
“to cherish you for as long as we both shall live.” – contract duration = lifetime and breach of contract on failure to deliver.I think the major things lacking are stated performance criteria, penalties for non-performance and proper termination clauses that are defined up front rather by a bunch of feminist-guided courts.
"...reinvent your life because you must; it is your life and its history and the present belong only to you.” It is Your Life, Charles Bukowski.
Marriage is a legal contract, it just has lots of blanks that say “to be filled in later by a judge in the event your wife turns on you for any reason”
It would be like signing an apartment lease where the rent is blank and says “to be decided by a judge if you terminate the lease and to be paid for the term of said lease and for a term of 18 years thereafter after you move out”
Another thought occurs..
Testament and Testimony are said to come from the same Latin root as “testes” in that when you were bearing witness you put your hand on your (or someone elses’) bollocks to prove you were telling the truth.
How can women be trusted if they have no bollocks to swear on?
Genesis 24:
1 Abraham was now very old, and the LORD had blessed him in every way. 2 He said to the senior servant in his household, the one in charge of all that he had, “Put your hand under my thigh. 3 I want you to swear by the LORD, the God of heaven and the God of earth, that you will not get a wife for my son from the daughters of the Canaanites, among whom I am living,
Neither of these posts is entirely serious.
"...reinvent your life because you must; it is your life and its history and the present belong only to you.” It is Your Life, Charles Bukowski.
Marriage is a legal contract, it just has lots of blanks that say “to be filled in later by a judge in the event your wife turns on you for any reason”
It would be like signing an apartment lease where the rent is blank and says “to be decided by a judge if you terminate the lease and to be paid for the term of said lease and for a term of 18 years thereafter after you move out”
very true, unfortunately.
"...reinvent your life because you must; it is your life and its history and the present belong only to you.” It is Your Life, Charles Bukowski.
There should be proper termination clauses included for breach of contract
I would DEFINITELY sue my ex-wife for breach of contract. She may win in divorce, but I would flatten her in legal fees and put up such a fight, she would be BEGGING me to stop – and I wouldn’t, until she’s left with nothing and sleeping on a park bench.
Fortunately, a man can’t be forced to sign a marriage contract, so it’s not a factor.
We all know about the legal system(s) being a complete disgrace when it comes to divorce
It’s unacceptable that the state has any foot in your personal life.
I wouldn’t even consider what “she” would do – or not. The issue is with the state and the attorneys who think they have any say in the matter. They don’t. And you can MAKE SURE they don’t – by never signing a fraudulent marriage contract
Fire a divorce attorney TODAY.
If Marriage were a proper legal contract…
Would it matter? It doesn’t benefit a man and never did. It was a benefit to the women and “HER” children.
If you keep doing what you've always done... you're gonna keep getting what you always got.Most contracts have an indemnification section, which spells out exactly what will happen if one person breaches the contract. Like a built-in prenup. There is also a section of Representations and Warranties on each party’s part. So you could make her rep that she is not a gold-digging whore, that she didn’t starve herself down to her marriage weight (that she has a little bit of a chance of not ballooning up), etc. Any material breach of a rep or warranty and the contract is null and void.
Order the good wine
It’s unacceptable that the state has any foot in your personal life.
Absolutely
by never signing a fraudulent marriage contract
Thanks for the link KM. I hadn’t read that before and it explains exactly the questions I was trying to raise. Every bloke even vaguely contemplating getting married should be forced to read that (along with a lot of other stuff).
Would it matter? It doesn’t benefit a man and never did. It was a benefit to the women and “HER” children.
In the real world, absolutely not. In the theoretical world I was trying to convey, proper termination clauses, performance criteria and limitations of liability could take way a lot of the benefits for women trying to trap a man in marriage.
"...reinvent your life because you must; it is your life and its history and the present belong only to you.” It is Your Life, Charles Bukowski.
yeah,
marriage is for the protection of females.
security and all that.
she has the state, courts and police standing behind her.
so just don’t,
don’t EVER sign that paper.
.
or you’ll be in my world.
i slowly navigate the legal system,
looking for loopholes to escape ..
.
like a jailhouse lawyer,
studying the law so i can get free.
..and i’m close.
real close.
i told myself this is the year,
and it is.
papers filed recently will cut the chains ,
and i will make a MEGA-post.
..so many sleepless nights going over all the factors.
coming soon,
Hitman 2.0 !!!
it’s going to be AMAZING…!!!
.
say a prayer for me men,
i have set into motion a legal action freeing me of the dreaded wallet raping iv’e been getting.
before 2018 it should be done.
and the righteous will get the reward( that’s ME )..!!!what if marriage were a proper legal contract and treated as such
Not trying to come off cynical, but this whole question is truly irrelevant.
A culmination of phenomena have f~~~ed the traditional paradigm for good.
3rd wave feminism is the main culprit, but there are other sources.
Also, it still won’t change their hypergamous nature, nor would it prevent from them from riding the c~~~ carousel.
As SpiritRR said, the smart phone was the ultimate dagger in the coffin.
Traditionalism is dead, besides marriage was bulls~~~ from its inception anyways.
The only thing marriage is good for is producing good, moral children.
Women have f~~~ed the familial unit beyond repair, so that shows how much they truly cared about family…
So this is question is unnecessary, and pointless.
Fuck bitches... literally and metaphorically
but this whole question is truly irrelevant.
I was attempting to point out the worthlessness of the marriage “contract” by comparing it to a business contract, as a not entirely serious point of interest.
The link provided by KM in a post above is a much better way of putting it.
So this is question is unnecessary, and pointless
I agree with all you say except your first and last statements.
While you may have contemplated such things for a long time, some of us are new to this and are attempting to learn by discussion as well as seeking guidance from experienced MGTOW such as yourself. There is nothing pointless or unnecessary in gaining more understanding.
"...reinvent your life because you must; it is your life and its history and the present belong only to you.” It is Your Life, Charles Bukowski.
In the theoretical world I was trying to convey, proper termination clauses, performance criteria and limitations of liability could take way a lot of the benefits for women trying to trap a man in marriage.
Aware.
I only meant . . . with “MRA” in one hand and “MGTOW” in the other, practicing prevention is the winner. There is no negotiating with terrorists.
I was attempting to point out the worthlessness of the marriage “contract” by comparing it to a business contract, as a not entirely serious point of interest.
MGTOWKnight also didn’t mean it as a dig when he said “the question is irrelevant”. He also means, there will be no negotiating with terrorists.
Women have grossly over leveraged, and they could throw themselves down on their knees propping up a diamond mined by a child and mounted on a platinum band, make me an offer I can’t refuse – and even if the contract means “the man won’t get destroyed”, I still fail to see it as a benefit.
If you keep doing what you've always done... you're gonna keep getting what you always got.I only meant . . . with “MRA” in one hand and “MGTOW” in the other, practicing prevention is the winner. There is no negotiating with terrorists.
Understood. Education of pre-married blokes as to the folly of marriage is the key point.
"...reinvent your life because you must; it is your life and its history and the present belong only to you.” It is Your Life, Charles Bukowski.
MGTOWKnight also didn’t mean it as a dig when he said “the question is irrelevant”. He also means, there will be no negotiating with terrorists
My apologies to MGTOWKnight for my misinterpretation of his response.
"...reinvent your life because you must; it is your life and its history and the present belong only to you.” It is Your Life, Charles Bukowski.
While you may have contemplated such things for a long time, some of us are new to this and are attempting to learn by discussion as well as seeking guidance from experienced MGTOW such as yourself. There is nothing pointless or unnecessary in gaining more understanding.
All good,
My statement wasn’t to come off as a personal stab.
For the subject presented, the marriage contract only has power extended to it from the two consenting parties entering said agreement.
Women have essentially torched the verbal document (vows), and scorched earth-level decimated the whole notion of entering into any agreement with them.
The whole idea of things ever going back to normal is just whimsical thinking.
Women aren’t going to give up their goodies now!
Can you imagine the pussy hat riot that would ensue if we took the little cupcake’s smart phone???!!!
A “paper” marriage contract isn’t worth s~~~, but for wiping your ass with it.
Women didn’t uphold their of the bargain, a paper document isn’t going to change that…
MGTOWKnight also didn’t mean it as a dig when he said “the question is irrelevant”. He also means, there will be no negotiating with terrorists.
@keymaster, exactly!
They have so much blood on their hands now. They destroy everything they touch.
Fuck bitches... literally and metaphorically
All good,
My statement wasn’t to come off as a personal stab.
Cheers.
Agreed. Could have presented the concept better, and it is indeed whimsical thinking. I’ve been looking at business contracts all day and the thought arose.
Women have essentially torched the document, and scorched earth-level the whole notion of entering any agreement with them.
Indeed. A lot of my anger and misery before finding MGTOW came from this.
A paper marriage contract isn’t worth s~~~, but for wiping your ass with it.
Women didn’t uphold their of the bargain, a document isn’t going to change that…
My ex-wife was adulterous, which she admitted, and she still got half my s~~~ and will be getting child maintenance for the next 5 to 8 years. My lack of understanding about the marriage “contract” has cost me a lot.
"...reinvent your life because you must; it is your life and its history and the present belong only to you.” It is Your Life, Charles Bukowski.
I’d welcome it if marriage were a proper legal contract. It would be an infinitely better situation than the status quo, which effectively rewards breach of contract.
"The secret to happiness is freedom... And the secret to freedom is courage." - Thucydides
They all breach the contract. Sometimes weeks of within being married.
Marriage isn’t coming back anytime soon. If my math is correct, we have about 50 years of feminism to undo.
F~~~ marriage.
Fuck this planet.My ex-wife was adulterous, which she admitted, and she still got half my s~~~ and will be getting child maintenance for the next 5 to 8 years. My lack of understanding about the marriage “contract” has cost me a lot.
Precisely.
Can you imagine any contract where the breaching party gets a fat payout at the expense of the party adhering to said contract?
Only in marriage!
Holy Matrimony my ass!
Fuck bitches... literally and metaphorically
Marriage is a legal contract, it just has lots of blanks that say “to be filled in later by a judge in the event your wife turns on you for any reason”
This sums up what I observed during my divorce and subsequent custody issues. A lot of the contract is decided by a judge after the breach occurs and not before the contract is made.
It’s fascinating to me that no one who enters a marriage contract knows what the hell is in it. We are taught it’s about love and compromise which is bulls~~~. It’s about a judge’s arbitrary decision and the outcome varies from judge to judge. No one would enter any other contract if it worked that way.
- AuthorPosts
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
921526
921524
919244
916783
915526
915524
915354
915129
914037
909862
908811
908810
908500
908465
908464
908300
907963
907895
907477
902002
901301
901106
901105
901104
901024
901017
900393
900392
900391
900390
899038
898980
896844
896798
896797
895983
895850
895848
893740
893036
891671
891670
891336
891017
890865
889894
889741
889058
888157
887960
887768
886321
886306
885519
884948
883951
881340
881339
880491
878671
878351
877678
