[CleanSlate]

(03-07-2017 12:42 AM)Hoser Wrote:  

I'm happily married, going on 16 years. There's something about having a legally and morally binding agreement with a girl I adore, til death do us part, that makes our life more rewarding and our sex more satisfying.

Modern marriage problems are a product of a faulty society, not a flawed manner of [marriage] agreement.

Properly planned marriage is a Good Thing. Be careful to not throw out the baby with the bath water.

Would you get married today if you were single?

It was a different world 16 years ago.

[Sidney Crosby]

If a chick feels "coerced" into a pre-nup then don't get married you stupid cunt.

[Rawmeo]

There should be a government service that offers prenup drafting for free in every country.

If the girl knows that by leaving you, she'll leave a plentiful life and become the Six Flags customer of the month for carousels, all that while you pick up the tab, there's no incentive for her to be a good wife. However, if she knows that by leaving you, she gets nothing, gets to share 50/50 of the kids, then she'll be a "sweet wife" rather than a pain in the ass that you hope isn't home when you arrive.

NEVER marry a girl who refuses to make a prenup. Never. What is the ONLY reason to refuse a prenup? Good answer.

I married a 28 y.o. virgin with an university degree and who comes from a complete family with both parents virgin at marriage, and the prenup was still mandatory. She didn't protest.

She's making me a sandwich as I type this post.

[Dalaran1991]

You guys are dreaming if you think prenup are the solutions. Prenups and divorce laws were in the Bible, that didnt stop women from cucking men all these times.

By the times prenup becomes popularized, dont you think that women would have up their legal game 10x and found their way around? They have been doing this since time immemorial and they have always been one step ahead of the game.

Women and courts can easily work around prenup if they want to. What makes you think she cant get a better lawyer than you? Nothing is as relentless and vicious as a woman bent on destroying a man's life. Google and see for yourself.

The anti-divorce cure is the same thing men have always used: pick a virgin bride with proper upbringing who wants you to be the revolving center of her life, adore you and is devoted to you. Keep her away from toxic influence as much as you can. AND get a prenup if you wanna be safe.

@Rawmeo: I'm pretty sure your wife is sweet and would make you a sandwhich even if you did not get a prenup. The game is all about screening.

Not to be an ass, but if ever, in the most hypothetical scenario, your sweet wife decide to divorce rape you, you would still be in a heap of trouble, prenup or not.

You can also do it like what Asian men have been doing a long time: before marriage, sign over your most prized asset to the woman who (supposedly) loves you the most and would be 100% against other predator women: your mom. The way Asian family works, all that assets are de facto yours but legally you have no right to it, and that would save your ass from divorce. I know at least a few cases of this.

[scrambled]

(03-06-2017 10:35 PM)Spaniard88 Wrote:  

(03-06-2017 01:36 PM)scrambled Wrote:  

^ Warning in many jurisdictions, like California, the court will test it for "conscientiousness" during a divorce despite full consent and lawyers on both sides. So no real escape--been this way for years

Of course there's an escape, you move out of California.

You don't get to determine the place where divorce is filed; "she" does by moving.

[mpr]

If you think that a prenup will protect you from divorce rape then you're in for a nasty surprise. A beta judge can refuse to uphold the prenup for dozens of reasons; including that he thinks it is unfair. Even if your prenup is enforced it won't protect you from: her seizing property earned during the marriage, child support, or in most states alimony. The only way to safely get married and have kids is to do it somewhere outside of North America or Europe. You'd have to marry a local. Then never move back to the west unless all of your kids are 18 and you're no longer married.

I've been dragged over the coals myself. There's an easy way to protect yourself from being divorce raped. Don't get married or have kids! If you have an incurable case of the baby rabies then find a way to have kids outside of the jurisdiction of western courts. Can't afford to do that? Then you can't afford to have kids.

[Hoser]

CleanSlate asked if I would have gotten married if it were today, not years ago like I did.

I'd have to say yes. Marriage is the only acceptable LTR, in my opinion.

However, having not seen firsthand what it's like dating. In America these days, I realize I may not fully know what I'm talking about.

I was very choosy then, and I'd be very choosy now. I suspect that just making sure the woman understands what will be expected of her, and being careful to not compromise by settling for a woman who doesn't check all of your "must have" boxes, should be sufficient.

[Hoser]

Also, to those of you denying that a pre-nup is effective, you're right and wrong. I agree now in hindsight that "cure" was too strong of a word to use in this thread's title.

However, the argument that "the judge will just ignore the pre-nup" is overly dismissive. If drafted by AND executed in the presence of a competent attorney, the contract will stand, and if it doesn't, you sue your lawyer for malpractice.

Note: the execution is as important as the construction. You want to be able to show, with video evidence, that the bride-to-be has had more than enough time, and adequate opportunity to hear from her own legal counsel, to consider, understand, and agree to the contract without feeling pressured to enter into it. So long as you have that, it can be as one-sided as you want it to be, up to the point that it becomes illegal or against public policy. Even then, you want to be sure to have a severability clause that means if one provision is overruled, the rest of the contract remains in force.

[BrazilianCocaine]

This may have been stated prior however I would like to echo the critical point that it's not the Pre-nup itself that protects you - It's the fact that most Women willing to agree to one are generally in an entirely different category than the massive amounts of hoes who turn their nose up at the idea....

The pre-nup itself isn't saving you it's being clear and upfront about things in the relationship that will save you a lot of pain and screen through the attention whore, gold diggers and other crazies who will react in a heavily bi-polar fashion to the mere suggestion of you legally and financially protecting yourself.

[BrazilianCocaine]

Also don't get married - And if you have to NEVER to an American born female...

[Phoenix]

I'd like to see the actual statistics on how often prenups are thrown out or modified by a judge in different countries.

So far everyone is just making broad generalizations based on no figures at all.

[dongiovanni]

http://www.csaladjog.com/divorce%20in%20Hungary.html

"the marriage creates a conjugal community between the spouses for the duration of their matrimonial life. In legal terms conjugal community of property means that all assets that the spouses acquire jointly or individually during the time of their matrimonial life (with certain exceptions) constitute their undivided joint property. The conjugal community of property does not extend to the assets of the spouses they already had when their marriage was solemnized; such assets will continue to be the separate assets of the husband or the wife."

Hungary ftw

[Bluto]

(03-06-2017 10:53 PM)Spaniard88 Wrote:  

You could say it binds you before God to your woman, but in America, even so-called Christians are by and large atheist, in thoughts and deeds anyhow. Very, very, very few people actually live their lives according to Christianity nowadays. If any religion or way of life is predominant in America, I'd say it's individualism, and belief in it is very strong.

As a question of Christian Philosophy, are you theologically considered to be married just by virtue of a marriage license from the state, the blessings of the clergy, or are you required to have both? I have not done the research so I cant say, but especially with gay marriage being legal these days, I would contend that a marriage decree from the Government these days is not worth the paper that it is printed on. The original philosophy of Marriage and how it is become perverted is a thread in of itself, if there is not one already out there.

Concerning the OP, this is a good shit test for any LTR, but a true failsafe is never going to happen until society changes drastically. Best advise so far that I have seen is discussed in this thread:

thread-56385.html

[Kid Twist]

^ This is why eastern christians don't have vows, don't have the juridical overarching everything, and therefore, don't have problematic and contradictory theology. You already knew the answer, Bluto, but I'm glad you asked.

The rhetorical question that proves it all is the very inquiry: "Does being married "legally," or in the eyes of the state, keep you together?"

Of course, we know the answer to that. Your faith, or at least something bigger than you, or something you believe in (keeping kids with a proper and healthy environment) ... is what sustains the relationship.

We've seen what the lack of this has done, and there isn't even shame or a second thought about it.

Spaniard88 is right on with his comment on individualism (and its spinoff, consumerism) being the "religion" of America.

[Hoser]

In the old days, just "knowing" a woman (in the Biblical sense, aka carnal knowledge) meant you two were married ("marriage" itself means a joining and commingling, for example saying that a wine is a marriage of certain flavors).

Then our ancestors added the ceremony part.

Then the State started getting its share.

Now we have movements like the one mentioned above, in which people are rejecting legal marriage in favor of just a ceremonial, unlicensed acknowledgment. I'm really seeing the appeal more and more.

In the US, legal marriage (compared to a pro forma or common-law-esque marriage) brings only a few useful benefits that I can think of off the top of my head:

1) Tax breaks and a few other financial or property ownership benefits, including automatically getting half her property, or more, if she dies without a will
2) Spousal Communications privilege to prohibit a spouse from sharing in court something you shared with her in private (plus she can't be compelled to testify against you in court)
3) Insurance policies automatically cover spouses and other legally-recognized family
4) Little perks like certain hospital visitation being available to family only

Our society really has ruined what was always such an essential and foundational part of civilization, and turned marriage into a purely transactional procedure. Sad!

[Razor Beast]

A pre nup is like a home security system. It's a deterrent to someone who would otherwise take anything they could get with ease. To someone determined to get what you have at all costs? Forget about it.

Why get married? Why reward and validate the entitlement complex that is destroying western society? I am consistently amazed at the shitty attitudes that women have no problem fronting on a daily basis. Some of you guys are insane. I guess living through someone else's pain with a red pill lens makes the decision so much easier.

[Razor Beast]

(03-07-2017 08:58 PM)Phoenix Wrote:  

I'd like to see the actual statistics on how often prenups are thrown out or modified by a judge in different countries.

So far everyone is just making broad generalizations based on no figures at all.

We just had a federal judge block an executive order on immigration last month. For a court system that sees itself as a higher authority than the commander in chief, I don't know how you could possibly expect a pre nup agreement to hold up in a feminized and cucked family court system.

For anyone familiar with legal contracts, every word of the agreement can be scrutinized and attacked. All they have to do is show that one sentence gives cause to invalidate the agreement to nullify it. But if you include a severability clause, then you have to worry about coming across as being very heavy handed and vengeful with the language in the agreement. This would give reason for some old feminist or cuck on the bench to give you the finger.

[panache]

Pre-nups are like going to the gym and only pumping your biceps. You feel like you're working out but actually aren't accomplishing anything.

What you really want is to set up a trust. You don't need a lawyer, you need a banker. Get your money set up in Jersey or Singapore. Get a family member in the trust as well. Have some amount of money you keep in a joint account with your wife. When you split, that's all she has a claim to.

Get your brother/mother/father signing on your house. That way her claim on it is nothing.

This is what people with real money have been doing for years. I'm not talking about your 20M net worth actor, but your 300M net worth old family money heir.

[Hoser]

I had $80k in Jersey and the Treasury Department froze it for no reason when I tried to wire it back to myself. Great plan.

[Malamore]

I got married two years ago to an Eastern Euro girl, I made her sign a prenup, I know intuitively that she now's I can walk away at any moment and the life style I provided for her would vanish in an instant with nothing she could do about it. I also don't recommend getting married if you haven't gotten the desire to sleep with tons of girls out of your system even if she is a 1 in a hundred thousand type, keeping mistresses is a fucking headache I know its just a matter of time until I slip up.

[RatInTheWoods]

Forget it in Australia.

You are dreaming if you think the legal industry is going to sit and let one of their most lucrative income streams (the stripping of assets from Betas, taking half and giving the vagina the rest) up so easily as a bit of signed paper.

They will never allow any method to shut the cash cow down.

Prenups (binding financial agreements in Oz), trust funds, assets held in others names - they have, can and will be thrown out by anti-male courts.

Nothing yet is a guarantee of safety. This needs to change.

[Darkwing Buck]

LMAO. Dumb enough to get married in 2017? You deserve everything that befalls you.

I don't even have pity for dudes who supposedly have game or are "redpilled" and choose to get married. If ya get took ya get took.

Good luck.

[griffinmill]

Coming soon:

New legal standard wherein your ex-wife feels like she was unlawfully coerced with undue influence into signing the pre-nuptial documents, rendering it null-and-void, with time spent in prison as a penalty for said unlawful coercion.

[astro]

I can easily say if I had been married to any of my LTRs I would have lost a lot. They all asked me to marry them too (of course, everything to gain and nothing to lose). None of them left me due to saying no. If a girl wants to leave me because I won't put a ring on it, then they aren't really what I was looking for.

Ironically, a girl I am seeing now is paying alimony to her ex. I feel bad for her, but at the same time I snicker.

All that said, if I was in a LTR with a rich girl I would consider it. Not gonna lie.

[lowside]

Can't you just be with a woman and live together till death do us part, without ever getting married?