Navigating the American Marriage Minefield (and what Kobe's nightmare can teach us)
12-19-2011, 09:42 AM
There's been plenty of talk lately on the forum about the practicality and pitfalls of marriage, and Kobe's debacle has only enhanced the buzz around this topic. It seems like there is a decently sized cadre of young guys who still cling to the hope that there could be some practical way to go about having a traditional, married relationship without the metaphorical AK-47 pointed at your head in the form of anti-male American family law (read: the 50-50 chance of divorcing and losing nearly everything). I count myself among them, so I know where dudes are coming from.
Of course, we're not stupid. We understand enough about game and female nature to know that the risks in this society for men are too great to let our more "beta", romantic sides take over and get us locked into an American marriage. It isn't practical. America is simply too hard on men who even hint at doing this (as Roosh noted here, one faces less penalties in other societies for being more affectionate/sentimental).
But wouldn't it be nice if we could, at the very least, minimize some of the risks of marriage, and just let things flow without fear?
I maintain that the best way to do this is to go overseas and marry in a more traditional and less anti-male society. For those who, for whatever reason, can't get on board with this, I'd like to offer another theoretical solution.
Pre-Nups
The pre-nup can do a lot more for you if you get married later on.
My readings have lead me to conclude that the assets most commonly risked by men in the event of a divorce are those acquired during the marriage. In many states (ex: California), the "50-50" split that is usually legally enforced applies only to those assets the male acquired while married. It is much harder for a woman to legally get at anything a man acquired prior to their wedding, especially if there is a pre-nup in place stating that pre-marital assets are off limits.
What Kobe tells us
This is part of why Kobe is so screwed right now. He married Vanessa during the early stages of his career, which means that the larger bulk of his income has come during their marriage. You can check out his year-by-year earnings right here. I'll copy/paste the figures:
Most recent contract
7 yr(s) / $136,400,000
2004: 14,175,000
2005: 15,946,875
2006: 17,718,750
2007: 19,490,625
2008: 21,262,500
2009: 23,034,375
2010: 24,806,250
Previous Contract (His second in the NBA)
1999-2003
Contract:6 yr(s) / $70,000,000
1999: 9,000,000
2000: 10,130,000
2001: 11,250,000
2002: 12,375,000
2003: 13,500,000
Rookie Contract
1996-1998
Contract:3 yr(s) / $3,501,240
1996: 1,015,000
1997: 1,167,240
1998: 1,319,000
There was also a 3 year, $84 million extension to his most recent contract signed in 2010, which will do this:
2011 25,244,000
2012 27,849,000
2013 30,453,000
He and Vanessa met in 1999, got engaged in 2000 and finally got married in 2001, which means that all of his annual earnings from 01 forward until 2011 are at risk, including his equally substantial endorsements that likely doubled his annual income in some years (his total earnings in 2010, including endorsements, were approx. $48 million, doubling his listed salary for that year). The hardest part of it all is that this is the period when his earnings were just beginning to climb to their peak (bigger contracts and bigger endorsements than he got pre-2001). This makes divorce a much bigger financial risk for him.
In other words: She snagged him at just the right time.
Compare this to a hypothetical in which he gets married at, say, age 36 (a point at which he will be very much in the twilight of his career with his last big contract and its $84M extension behind him). The $200 million+ he'd have made during his career will be largely off limits to the woman he chooses at that point. If he draws up a pre-nup to legally specify this more clearly, it'd be much tougher to destroy/circumvent. That's as close to "iron-clad" as a pre-nup could probably get. If she chose to divorce him later, she'd have to settle for dividing his (much less substantial) post-career earnings, and maybe angling for some alimony (a threat which could also be dealt with and minimized by a well-drawn pre-nup).
So, to those men who still insist on marriage while under the auspices of anti-male American family law, internalize the following points:
The keys
1. Be patient. Marry a younger woman (say mid to late 20's) later in life when some of your highest earning years have passed and you've built some relatively substantial assets/savings. Late 30's/early 40's is a good target. Assuming that you have a decent career/money, decent game and lack a beer gut, you're going to be more appealing to more women then than you'll have been at 22-26.
Hold out for as long as your looks will allow you to still snag a younger, quality woman for marriage. If you're targeting foreign women for marriage (from cultures where older men are looked upon more favorably by younger women than they are in the USA), you could afford to wait even longer, bringing her here when you're ready. Of course, don't wait too long if you intend to start a family-you don't want to keel over at your son's high school graduation.
The reason divorce is so lethal to most men is because they tend to marry in their younger years(25-30) due to naivete and societal pressure, and are thus married during their most productive years, when they acquire most of their assets. Woman can easily claim entitlement to all of this, which is why even a pre-nup signed beforehand can't completely save you. Wait and you drastically lower your risk of getting hit with this problem-its much tougher for a family court judge to rip up a pre-nup and hand a woman assets that you earned well before she even came into the picture. The more assets you can stock up before you marry, the better the shape you'll be in.
2. Get the best family lawyer you can afford.
3. Draw up a pre-nup explicitly stating that pre-marital assets are off limits and precluding alimony (or setting alimony for a sum and length of time that you can stomach). This will be difficult for her to circumvent, and minimize the hit you take (she could still get something, but will not be able to ruin you or touch your core savings). It will also prevent any green-card horror stories from coming to fruition if you brought a foreign girl back and she divorces you/attempts to cash in (it happens).
This is the best you'll be able to do in the USA marriage wise. Of course, if you can help it, I still suggest you don't marry here at all, but if you just can't help yourself, at least go in as well prepared as you can.
Bottomline: Marry overseas or marry late with a well drawn pre-nup. That's the best you can do.
Of course, we're not stupid. We understand enough about game and female nature to know that the risks in this society for men are too great to let our more "beta", romantic sides take over and get us locked into an American marriage. It isn't practical. America is simply too hard on men who even hint at doing this (as Roosh noted here, one faces less penalties in other societies for being more affectionate/sentimental).
But wouldn't it be nice if we could, at the very least, minimize some of the risks of marriage, and just let things flow without fear?
I maintain that the best way to do this is to go overseas and marry in a more traditional and less anti-male society. For those who, for whatever reason, can't get on board with this, I'd like to offer another theoretical solution.
Pre-Nups
The pre-nup can do a lot more for you if you get married later on.
My readings have lead me to conclude that the assets most commonly risked by men in the event of a divorce are those acquired during the marriage. In many states (ex: California), the "50-50" split that is usually legally enforced applies only to those assets the male acquired while married. It is much harder for a woman to legally get at anything a man acquired prior to their wedding, especially if there is a pre-nup in place stating that pre-marital assets are off limits.
What Kobe tells us
This is part of why Kobe is so screwed right now. He married Vanessa during the early stages of his career, which means that the larger bulk of his income has come during their marriage. You can check out his year-by-year earnings right here. I'll copy/paste the figures:
Most recent contract
7 yr(s) / $136,400,000
2004: 14,175,000
2005: 15,946,875
2006: 17,718,750
2007: 19,490,625
2008: 21,262,500
2009: 23,034,375
2010: 24,806,250
Previous Contract (His second in the NBA)
1999-2003
Contract:6 yr(s) / $70,000,000
1999: 9,000,000
2000: 10,130,000
2001: 11,250,000
2002: 12,375,000
2003: 13,500,000
Rookie Contract
1996-1998
Contract:3 yr(s) / $3,501,240
1996: 1,015,000
1997: 1,167,240
1998: 1,319,000
There was also a 3 year, $84 million extension to his most recent contract signed in 2010, which will do this:
2011 25,244,000
2012 27,849,000
2013 30,453,000
He and Vanessa met in 1999, got engaged in 2000 and finally got married in 2001, which means that all of his annual earnings from 01 forward until 2011 are at risk, including his equally substantial endorsements that likely doubled his annual income in some years (his total earnings in 2010, including endorsements, were approx. $48 million, doubling his listed salary for that year). The hardest part of it all is that this is the period when his earnings were just beginning to climb to their peak (bigger contracts and bigger endorsements than he got pre-2001). This makes divorce a much bigger financial risk for him.
In other words: She snagged him at just the right time.
Compare this to a hypothetical in which he gets married at, say, age 36 (a point at which he will be very much in the twilight of his career with his last big contract and its $84M extension behind him). The $200 million+ he'd have made during his career will be largely off limits to the woman he chooses at that point. If he draws up a pre-nup to legally specify this more clearly, it'd be much tougher to destroy/circumvent. That's as close to "iron-clad" as a pre-nup could probably get. If she chose to divorce him later, she'd have to settle for dividing his (much less substantial) post-career earnings, and maybe angling for some alimony (a threat which could also be dealt with and minimized by a well-drawn pre-nup).
So, to those men who still insist on marriage while under the auspices of anti-male American family law, internalize the following points:
The keys
1. Be patient. Marry a younger woman (say mid to late 20's) later in life when some of your highest earning years have passed and you've built some relatively substantial assets/savings. Late 30's/early 40's is a good target. Assuming that you have a decent career/money, decent game and lack a beer gut, you're going to be more appealing to more women then than you'll have been at 22-26.
Hold out for as long as your looks will allow you to still snag a younger, quality woman for marriage. If you're targeting foreign women for marriage (from cultures where older men are looked upon more favorably by younger women than they are in the USA), you could afford to wait even longer, bringing her here when you're ready. Of course, don't wait too long if you intend to start a family-you don't want to keel over at your son's high school graduation.
The reason divorce is so lethal to most men is because they tend to marry in their younger years(25-30) due to naivete and societal pressure, and are thus married during their most productive years, when they acquire most of their assets. Woman can easily claim entitlement to all of this, which is why even a pre-nup signed beforehand can't completely save you. Wait and you drastically lower your risk of getting hit with this problem-its much tougher for a family court judge to rip up a pre-nup and hand a woman assets that you earned well before she even came into the picture. The more assets you can stock up before you marry, the better the shape you'll be in.
2. Get the best family lawyer you can afford.
3. Draw up a pre-nup explicitly stating that pre-marital assets are off limits and precluding alimony (or setting alimony for a sum and length of time that you can stomach). This will be difficult for her to circumvent, and minimize the hit you take (she could still get something, but will not be able to ruin you or touch your core savings). It will also prevent any green-card horror stories from coming to fruition if you brought a foreign girl back and she divorces you/attempts to cash in (it happens).
This is the best you'll be able to do in the USA marriage wise. Of course, if you can help it, I still suggest you don't marry here at all, but if you just can't help yourself, at least go in as well prepared as you can.
Bottomline: Marry overseas or marry late with a well drawn pre-nup. That's the best you can do.
Know your enemy and know yourself, find naught in fear for 100 battles. Know yourself but not your enemy, find level of loss and victory. Know thy enemy but not yourself, wallow in defeat every time.
