[Deluge]

They say no prenup is impenetrable, and it's impossible to get away without paying your ex-wife a cent. I also know prenup's don't cover custody of the children.

So how much can good prenup actually cover your ass?

And how hard is it for your ex wife's lawyers to get around it?

I'm basically looking for any info on prenups possible, it hasn't been delved into on the forum before.

[Riker]

Wait but.... can't you get away without getting married? Society and family influence too strong?

[Roosh]

Prenup info = don't get married

[Excelsior]

(12-17-2011 03:44 AM)P Dog Wrote:  

They say no prenup is impenetrable, and it's impossible to get away without paying your ex-wife a cent. I also know prenup's don't cover custody of the children.

So how much can good prenup actually cover your ass?

I can only speak to the United States.

Here, a family court judge can disregard the conditions of a pre-nup if he/she deems it "unfair" in any way. Unless you are wealthy or powerful enough to a) afford an elite attorney or b) curry favor with judges, you are running a very big risk leaning on a pre-nup. A judge can tear up the whole thing at his/her discretion.

Quote:

And how hard is it for your ex wife's lawyers to get around it?

They'll have the entire family court system on their side, so not hard.

I sympathize with you, as I've been trying to find a safe way to navigate the marriage maze myself. I'd love to be able to safely get married to a woman I cared for without the clear risk of my life being destroyed on her whim with government assistance. I am not ashamed to admit the fact that I'd enjoy finding one great girl and building something more with her over time within the context of a marital union, without fear.

I'm slowly coming to the firm conclusion that this isn't possible, at least not in the United States under current laws. Even cohabitation is unfeasible since many states declare common-law marriages after a 6 month-2 year period of cohabitation, subjecting you to all the same legal and financial risks of marriage. I believe that this is true in Australia as well.

Marrying here as a male means giving the woman complete legal leverage and the ability to permanently destroy your life after a divorce. She will have all the power-there is no way around this and no ironclad protection for you. Marriage 2.0 is built for women, not men-there is nothing in it for you. If you insist on getting married, do it outside of the US/Canada/Australia (though the USA is, in my observation, the worst environment of all) and do not bring her back.

[Deluge]

Well I'm still young but I really do want kids, and lots of them (making up for being an only child?). I'm thinking either marrying a fellow Sri Lankan, preferably one born and raised in Sri Lanka or basically living with and having children with a woman in everything but name ie. cohabiting.

So say I split with my long term girlfriend who I have children with (I have no doubt she'd get custody) I would STILL lose half my fucking shit even though we were only cohabiting? How would that even work? No marriage = no divorce proceedings so there shouldn't be any way for her to access any property or financial instruments that aren't in her name.

[UrbanNerd]

Once you have kids, that pre-nupt is less powerful. Pre-nupts are really to reduce ALIMONY...not child-support. So if you had even an iron-clad pre-nupt, you would still pay child-support.

As I have stated many times, the dudes with decent money need to STOP impregnating and/or marrying women who have FAR below your net worth. I mean dudes are crying about being taken to the cleaners but....

You make $300,000 and married/knocked-up a friggin' waitress??....how did you THINK the money was going to be split up?

Me?...if a North American chick doesn't make at least 80% of my income there is NO CHANCE at a serious relationship. When traveling, sure I will fukk some 3rd-world country chick. I am not as worried because those foreign chicks are NOT getting my real name anyway, so if that condom breaks...good luck trying to locate me.

[TudoBem]

Don't get married, pre nups as others have pointed out, are not always reliable. Also, if some lizard tried to pull the I'm pregnant bs, good answers include "wouldn't you rather have a child with someone who wants to be its father?" or "if it turns out to be mine, I'll pay whatever child support the judge orders." That usually puts a quick stop to their bullshit idea of trapping you.

[Excelsior]

(12-17-2011 10:15 AM)P Dog Wrote:  

Well I'm still young but I really do want kids, and lots of them (making up for being an only child?). I'm thinking either marrying a fellow Sri Lankan, preferably one born and raised in Sri Lanka or basically living with and having children with a woman in everything but name ie. cohabiting.

Try to do this in Sri Lanka if you can get away with it. Bring her home and all bets are off.

Quote:

So say I split with my long term girlfriend who I have children with (I have no doubt she'd get custody) I would STILL lose half my fucking shit even though we were only cohabiting? How would that even work? No marriage = no divorce proceedings so there shouldn't be any way for her to access any property or financial instruments that aren't in her name.

If you cohabit for more than 2 years, you'll be treated just like a married couple.
It may be possible to create written agreements to circumvent some of these side effects, but I'm not familiar enough with Australian law to speak on this. I know that in the US, you can avoid this by living in a state that doesn't enforce common law marriage or getting an agreement done before cohabiting. Same with parts of Canada.

[el mechanico]

Athlone I heard that if you check into a hotel room alone every few months it breaks up commonlaw marriage laws..Myth? And I've never heard of a commmonlaw divorce going to court. Is it really something to worry about?

[Excelsior]

(12-17-2011 01:49 PM)el mechanico Wrote:  

Athlone I heard that if you check into a hotel room alone every few months it breaks up commonlaw marriage laws..Myth? And I've never heard of a commmonlaw divorce going to court. Is it really something to worry about?

I'd have to look into the hotel thing. I'm sure there are plenty of loopholes one can use to avoid the common law marriage trap.
And yes, a woman can sue you following the breakup of a common law arrangement. In states where it is allowed, courts can review your living arrangement and, if they decide that the prerequisites appeared to be there for a common law marriage, treat it accordingly.

The good news for guys is that only 11 states(plus DC) allow for commonlaw marriages to be contracted in the first place, and even in these places it has to be made clear that there was some sort of intent to marry. They're easy to avoid if you know about them. You just have to be careful not to indicate that you are married (keep your assets separate, maintain your names, don't call her your wife, etc).

The risk is that a woman can drag you to court by claiming that you showed an intent to marry and establish a common law marriage before you broke up. This is also how palimony suits are often filed (more info on those here).

[Pusscrook]

Well common law is one thing, but, from personal experience , I can tell you that there is a far more sinister scheme allowed to play it in court if a bitch can prove that she has established some sort of residency in your place. (This may vary from state to state).

I had a bitch a few years ago that I allowed to live in my place when I was gone overseas for work. She also received mail, and, had some of her clothing, books, jewelry, etc., at my place.

I decided to kick the bitch out one day by calling the Sheriff's dept. to have her removed. She didn't have any way to take her shit with her and it was left at my place. THe next day I inventoried her shit, and video taped me putting everything in boxes. About a week later, the Sheriff, came pounding on my door with a T.R.O., and totally fucked me up. The bitch had filed this order , signed by a judge stating that I was in possession of her belongings and refused to give them back. The order had a long list attached to it, with all sorts of what she stated was her belongings. . When they let her in , she started going thru the boxes and told the Sheriff that jewelry was missing, shoes were missing, a flat screen that was not in the pile , and a host of other little shit. The sheriff told her that she needed to go to the court house to file civil action for everything that was not on the list. I had to get a lawyer, and the first thing he asked me was whether or not I had receipts for anything on the list that was not hers. I had to dig thru tons of papers, and beg my bank to send me 3 years worth of transactions( they only go back for one year for free so I had to pay extra for this shit). THere were only two items that I could not find in my records. When we went to court, the dumb bitch tried to argue with the judge and the lawyer about what she thought was hers. The judge merely asked if any of us had receipts for anything and my lawyer presented the receipts and bank docs. For the things she claimed I either threw away/gave away(shoes jewelry, etc.) she had no receipts so she was not entitled to any refund, however , on the things that I did not have receipts for ,but was contested (thank god they were small) we had to split it. Of course the whore wanted big ticket items, but the judge was having none of that, since those things I had receipts for. What saved me was the video evidence of me carefully packing her shit in boxes, my inventory of her shit, and my receipts. I have often wondered if she ever found her shoes, jewelry, books, etc.......

[kimleebj]

If you are really concerned about unintended common law marriage, then just have her sign a paper every year that says "We are not married."

[Deluge]

(12-17-2011 05:00 PM)Pusscrook Wrote:  

Well common law is one thing, but, from personal experience , I can tell you that there is a far more sinister scheme allowed to play it in court if a bitch can prove that she has established some sort of residency in your place. (This may vary from state to state).

I had a bitch a few years ago that I allowed to live in my place when I was gone overseas for work. She also received mail, and, had some of her clothing, books, jewelry, etc., at my place.

I decided to kick the bitch out one day by calling the Sheriff's dept. to have her removed. She didn't have any way to take her shit with her and it was left at my place. THe next day I inventoried her shit, and video taped me putting everything in boxes. About a week later, the Sheriff, came pounding on my door with a T.R.O., and totally fucked me up. The bitch had filed this order , signed by a judge stating that I was in possession of her belongings and refused to give them back. The order had a long list attached to it, with all sorts of what she stated was her belongings. . When they let her in , she started going thru the boxes and told the Sheriff that jewelry was missing, shoes were missing, a flat screen that was not in the pile , and a host of other little shit. The sheriff told her that she needed to go to the court house to file civil action for everything that was not on the list. I had to get a lawyer, and the first thing he asked me was whether or not I had receipts for anything on the list that was not hers. I had to dig thru tons of papers, and beg my bank to send me 3 years worth of transactions( they only go back for one year for free so I had to pay extra for this shit). THere were only two items that I could not find in my records. When we went to court, the dumb bitch tried to argue with the judge and the lawyer about what she thought was hers. The judge merely asked if any of us had receipts for anything and my lawyer presented the receipts and bank docs. For the things she claimed I either threw away/gave away(shoes jewelry, etc.) she had no receipts so she was not entitled to any refund, however , on the things that I did not have receipts for ,but was contested (thank god they were small) we had to split it. Of course the whore wanted big ticket items, but the judge was having none of that, since those things I had receipts for. What saved me was the video evidence of me carefully packing her shit in boxes, my inventory of her shit, and my receipts. I have often wondered if she ever found her shoes, jewelry, books, etc.......

Bitches be crazy.

Common-law marriages can only be enforced in Alabama, Colorado, D.C, Iowa, Kansas, Montana, New Hampshire (only after one dies so the other can inherit), Oklahoma, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Texas & Utah.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common-law_...w_marriage

So my understanding is that in the event of an LTR split outside of the jurisdictions above, besides the custody of the children your partner can only claim ownership of what is already in her name?

[Riker]

[Pusscrook]

(12-17-2011 10:15 AM)P Dog Wrote:  

Well I'm still young but I really do want kids, and lots of them (making up for being an only child?). I'm thinking either marrying a fellow Sri Lankan, preferably one born and raised in Sri Lanka or basically living with and having children with a woman in everything but name ie. cohabiting.

So say I split with my long term girlfriend who I have children with (I have no doubt she'd get custody) I would STILL lose half my fucking shit even though we were only cohabiting? How would that even work? No marriage = no divorce proceedings so there shouldn't be any way for her to access any property or financial instruments that aren't in her name.

P, are you wanting to marry to have kids, or is it that you just want a lot of kids ? If it is the latter, I would think Sri Lanka is the ideal place to breed anything that moves. You could have hundreds of P's running around in that place.

[blurb]

I really don't understand this obsession about marriage. Why do men want to get married so bad? I think the number one reason is to have children and that the children have a good environment to grow up in.

I am by no means an expert, but here is my humble opinion on the alternatives of an Anglo marriage:

1) Move abroad to a foreign country not plagued by feminism where the laws are in your favor and marry a local.

2) If you really want kids but do not want to move abroad, get an egg donor. Raise the kids by yourself along with a nanny. All the benefits of a wife without the costs.

[MiXX]

Marriage is for idiots!!! Unless you marry a woman that makes 5x more $$$ than you, and has 5x more assets than you, but we all know women NEVER marry down, they are too smart for that!

MIxx

[Deluge]

(12-17-2011 09:36 PM)Pusscrook Wrote:  

(12-17-2011 10:15 AM)P Dog Wrote:  

Well I'm still young but I really do want kids, and lots of them (making up for being an only child?). I'm thinking either marrying a fellow Sri Lankan, preferably one born and raised in Sri Lanka or basically living with and having children with a woman in everything but name ie. cohabiting.

So say I split with my long term girlfriend who I have children with (I have no doubt she'd get custody) I would STILL lose half my fucking shit even though we were only cohabiting? How would that even work? No marriage = no divorce proceedings so there shouldn't be any way for her to access any property or financial instruments that aren't in her name.

P, are you wanting to marry to have kids, or is it that you just want a lot of kids ? If it is the latter, I would think Sri Lanka is the ideal place to breed anything that moves. You could have hundreds of P's running around in that place.

I want to sire my own dynasty, raise my sons to wealthy influential international men of mystery. Definitely thinking about doing that from Sri Lanka, although I really don't want to live and raise children in the third world corrupt authoritarian shit hole that is modern Sri Lanka. I've been thinking out of Buenos Aires due to it's global status, women and dirt cheapness despite a high standard of living. I have no clue how strong feminism's grip on family law is in South America though.