Women Against Prenups

[WolfParticipant 890]

I watched a video earlier on prenups, and it got me thinking: why are most, if not all women, totally against prenups? To me, it’s simple: they marry men in order to extract what he can provide during and after the marriage. A marriage certificate is essentially a legally binding contract that grants her access to his resources. Prenups take away, or mitigate, this power and control over his resources.

Now, a woman would never give this reason for objecting to a prenup, so what reasons do they give?

[Soldier-MedicParticipant 2566]

Why would you think that you would need a prenup if you were going to marry me?   Sob!  If you loved me then you would know that I’m not that kind of woman.   Sniff!  I’m not after you for your money.   Snotbubble!

Reason 1. Sob!

Reason 2. Sniff!

Reason 3. Snotbubble!

"I asked you a question. I didn't ask you to repeat what the voices in you head are telling you" ~ Me. ........Yes I'm still angry.

[RoyDalParticipant]

Society asks MGTOWs: Why are you not making more tax-slaves?

[WolfParticipant 890]

They don’t like it when it’s the other way around: Article

I think the subtitle sums it up best… “When I got married as a penniless 24-year-old, I never imagined I’d outearn my husband or how that would affect me financially, especially when we got divorced.”

 

[ILiveAgainParticipant]

Soldier-Medic wrote:

Why would you think that you would need a prenup if you were going to marry me? Sob! If you loved me then you would know that I’m not that kind of woman. Sniff! I’m not after you for your money. Snotbubble! Reason 1. Sob! Reason 2. Sniff! Reason 3. Snotbubble!

Oh god …. I’m sorry Soldier-Medic … I didn’t mean the pre nup ….. my mother put me up to it.

Don’t cry ….. we won’t do it ok.

I love you Soldier-Medic …. I really do 😂

[WolfParticipant 890]

From a female lawyer: Link

1. They are almost always coercive

2. They lack consideration

3. The people entering into them have no idea what marriage is

4. There is often a silent party to the prenup who is controlling the process

5. The attorneys pushing prenuptial agreements for first marriages have no sensitivity to the destruction they cause

6. Prenuptial agreements usually lack minimum estate distribution if the marriage is ongoing at the time of the death of a party

7. They create a lifetime of corrosive memories

8. They make the less-moneyed party make legal representations that are simply not the truth

9. They are always unfair

10. They show a disregard of the law

[Biggvs_DickvsParticipant 3725]

But it isn’t even the fact that I had to give him half that I find so egregious. It’s the alimony he demanded I pay him on top of it that makes me very, very angry—like scream-really-loud, get-drunk, and eat-gratuitous-carbohydrates angry. On the first day of every month, I have to write him a mother^#%*ing check

Welcome to equality sweetheart. Don’t you just love it? Funny how she neglects to mention how unfair this has been to men over the years, only when it affects HER in the negative does it suddenly become a travesty.

"Data, I would be delighted to offer any advice I can on understanding women. When I have some, I'll let you know." --Captain Picard,

[UnbelievableyetnotParticipant 512]

If it were, the prenup wouldn’t be needed, and the parties could simply rely on the very fair and reasonable laws of divorce.

You sure she’s a lawyer, not a comedienne?

[BDParticipant 1146]

Wolf wrote:

they marry men in order to extract what he can provide during and after the marriage. A marriage certificate is essentially a legally binding contract that grants her access to his resources. Prenups take away, or mitigate, this power and control over his resources.

And they use their ultimate measure of manipulation, they use the word “LOVE”.

The word LOVE is a red flag.

Actions are what prove LOVE, not saying it.

And real LOVE does not include resource extraction or social prostitution.

Because in order to be able to think, you have to risk being offensive.

[sidecarParticipant 35837]

Wolf wrote:

From a female lawyer: Link
1. They are almost always coercive
2. They lack consideration
3. The people entering into them have no idea what marriage is
4. There is often a silent party to the prenup who is controlling the process
5. The attorneys pushing prenuptial agreements for first marriages have no sensitivity to the destruction they cause
6. Prenuptial agreements usually lack minimum estate distribution if the marriage is ongoing at the time of the death of a party
7. They create a lifetime of corrosive memories
8. They make the less-moneyed party make legal representations that are simply not the truth
9. They are always unfair
10. They show a disregard of the law

Sounds to me like Ms. Female Lawyer is talking about the marriage contract itself, not pre-nups.

[kizellParticipant 368]

I went through a messy divorce 2 years ago, and ever since then I have been telling people 2 things:

1.  Get a goddamn prenuptial agreement if you must get married

2.  The way women are able to use divorce laws in their favor is conclusive proof that “equality” is not desired nor important.

[Soldier-MedicParticipant 2566]

Wolf wrote:

They don’t like it when it’s the other way around: Article I think the subtitle sums it up best… “When I got married as a penniless 24-year-old, I never imagined I’d outearn my husband or how that would affect me financially, especially when we got divorced.”

Read the comments below the article.

They are mostly men welcoming her to a man’s world.

ROFL

"I asked you a question. I didn't ask you to repeat what the voices in you head are telling you" ~ Me. ........Yes I'm still angry.

[Executor MaxwellParticipant 591]

Wolf wrote:

Now, a woman would never give this reason for objecting to a prenup, so what reasons do they give?

The old standard is “but prenups aren’t romantic” haven’t seen much variety beyond that because they want to stick to emotional operation.

The response they hate the most that they got from those that looked in to it enough is “well I don’t think marriage contracts are very romantic.” With a little extra emphasis on the “contract” part. That response is reviled because it changes the flow of the conversation forcing logical discussion. That or she has to defend the idea that contracts are romantic… but not the prenup contract just the marriage contract.

The key as a man was to all ways refer to it as a “marriage contract” every time in the conversation. As long as you didn’t ever drop that point it made it into an almost unwinnable argument for her particularly since a guy that looked in to it enough to know that tidbit understood that this was one thing he must never surrender on.

Of course these days I’d suggest sticking with just never get married under any circumstance.

[sidecarParticipant 35837]

Executor Maxwell wrote:

The old standard is “but prenups aren’t romantic”

To which you reply: “Neither is divorce romantic, but that’s never stopped a woman from getting one.”

[BufordParticipant 935]

SO….

Men walking away from marriage for totally cogent and intelligent reasons.

The answer that the brilliant female mind comes up with to reverse this trend is…?

no more prenups…….

"This happens every time one of these floozies starts poontangin' around with those show folk fags. - Sheriff Buford T. Justice"

[DakotaParticipant 341]

Wolf wrote:

9. They are always unfair

Ol’ number 9.  My favorite.  “IT’S NOT FAIR.”  What?  Are we f~~~ing 6 now?  When a lion grabs a Thompson Gazelle by the neck while his Pride eats the damn thing while it’s still looking around…Yeah, tell me more about being “fair.”  This is life.  Eat or be eaten.  The prenup keeps a man from being completely devoured.

[FermatParticipant 3478]

This very issue is one of the reasons I do not understand how some MGTOWs still decide to marry in a grand effort to have their cake and eat it too. They declare “I signed a pre-nup so I’m safe”, meanwhile they resent you for signing it and are incapable of showing you true love because they are angry you “do not trust them to not steal your money.” Conversely, if one gets married and does not sign a pre-nup, she will feign “love” and “interest” to one day leave you and leave with half or more of what you worked for. The rare females or so called NAWALTs who do not engage in this cruel form of highway robbery are those that have “settled” and “have more to lose than to gain” by divorcing their man. Thus, they aren’t truly happy with you since they have had to “settle” and their behavior throughout the marriage will reflect that attitude. It’s a game a man cannot win and thus should never engage in.

I have discovered a truly remarkable list of reasons why women are not necessary for a happy life, but alas this margin is too small to contain it.

[WolfParticipant 890]

Biggvs_Dickvs wrote:

But it isn’t even the fact that I had to give him half that I find so egregious. It’s the alimony he demanded I pay him on top of it that makes me very, very angry—like scream-really-loud, get-drunk, and eat-gratuitous-carbohydrates angry. On the first day of every month, I have to write him a mother^#%*ing check

Welcome to equality sweetheart. Don’t you just love it? Funny how she neglects to mention how unfair this has been to men over the years, only when it affects HER in the negative does it suddenly become a travesty.

Absolutely! I LMAO every time I think about that article.

Executor Maxwell wrote:

The key as a man was to all ways refer to it as a “marriage contract” every time in the conversation. As long as you didn’t ever drop that point it made it into an almost unwinnable argument for her particularly since a guy that looked in to it enough to know that tidbit understood that this was one thing he must never surrender on.

Of course these days I’d suggest sticking with just never get married under any circumstance.

That’s clever, and I like it. Always refer to it as a “marriage contract” because that’s what it is. Her hamster wheel would go into overdrive…

I agree that it’s best to stay clear of marriage all together. More trouble than it’s worth and prenups can be successfully challenged in court.

Fermat wrote:

They declare “I signed a pre-nup so I’m safe”, meanwhile they resent you for signing it and are incapable of showing you true love because they are angry you “do not trust them to not steal your money.”

Yes, a guy would have to deal with that reality. However, one is not necessarily safe having a prenup. I’ve read case law where the prenup didn’t hold up.

 

[WolfParticipant 890]

I wonder how rich the man of her dreams is? Help! He Wants Me to Sign a Prenup

 

[nerowolfeParticipant 13]

The Nebraska Supreme Court just ruled against a man in an alimony case ( http://www.omaha.com/news/metro/retired-farmer-must-pay-more-in-alimony-than-monthly-income/article_2cc808d0-4619-5242-b428-1f907c5f37da.html)

 

The upshot is that prior to their marriage, they signed an agreement to exempt premarital assets from the marriage. The asset in question is land that the man owned prior to his marriage. The court ruled that premarital assets can be used to calculate alimony payments.  This poor guy is now forced to pay his ex-wife more than his monthly income in alimony. He will have to sell the land, or borrow against it to pay.

My youngest son has vowed never to marry.  I can’t argue with him on that.

[Author]

Posts