|
f 24 m 48, no need to read more
|
# ? Aug 19, 2020 23:46 |
|
|
# ? Apr 28, 2024 05:52 |
|
48 / 2 + 7 =31 yeah that's a no from me dawg
|
# ? Aug 19, 2020 23:47 |
|
lol he's literally lived two of her lives and hasn't figured it out yet. Probably time to cut your losses on that one.
|
# ? Aug 19, 2020 23:53 |
|
quote:But sorry ya’ll, I genuinely love him and don’t think its reasonable to just up and leave someone because they are reckless with money lol.
|
# ? Aug 19, 2020 23:59 |
|
Place your bets: - She has low self esteem and/or zero dating experience - Dude is devastatingly attractive
|
# ? Aug 20, 2020 00:02 |
|
Immature people are drawn to people who are much younger but mature for their age Mature people are drawn to people who are much older but immature for their age It's weird but it makes for GREAT content
|
# ? Aug 20, 2020 00:06 |
|
Not a Children posted:Place your bets: It's the first one. If it was the second he wouldn't be engaged to her.
|
# ? Aug 20, 2020 01:08 |
|
quote:I genuinely love him and don’t think its reasonable to just up and leave someone because they are reckless with money lol Oh, really? I do.
|
# ? Aug 20, 2020 03:31 |
|
From the /r/relationships thread, these are my favoriteSoylent Pudding posted:AITA for letting everyone we know find out about the details of the prenup I was asked to sign? Short term attempt to be a greedy gently caress actually results in long-term destruction of reputation and job opportunities
|
# ? Aug 20, 2020 04:19 |
|
If you don't have a job you don't need a prenup, if you don't have a fiancee you also don't need a prenup, looks like his problem has solved itself. Win/win for both of them
|
# ? Aug 20, 2020 05:45 |
|
I like it but it feels too good to be true.
|
# ? Aug 20, 2020 06:03 |
|
Should've had her sign the NDA first
|
# ? Aug 20, 2020 07:06 |
|
Not a Children posted:Place your bets: One r/relationships thread mantra is 'picture the people in these stories as much fatter than you first presume'. Though another is DICAP; dick is cheap and plentiful.
|
# ? Aug 20, 2020 07:55 |
|
AreWeDrunkYet posted:
theater is expensive
|
# ? Aug 20, 2020 11:39 |
|
Sir Bobert Fishbone posted:lol he's literally lived two of her lives and hasn't figured it out yet. Probably time to cut your losses on that one. Homer: "awwww I thought I'd be happy living two of her lives" Moe: "You're thinking of a guy whose lived through two knives"
|
# ? Aug 20, 2020 11:52 |
|
StormDrain posted:I like it but it feels too good to be true. I've seen other instances where guys think they can write a prenup that forfeits all their partners rights. Really the surprising bit is the social pushback Dan received. But I'm sure Dan is getting the validation he needs from the MRA subreddits to make up for it.
|
# ? Aug 20, 2020 12:22 |
|
Soylent Pudding posted:I've seen other instances where guys think they can write a prenup that forfeits all their partners rights. Really the surprising bit is the social pushback Dan received. But I'm sure Dan is getting the validation he needs from the MRA subreddits to make up for it. The amount of MRA / reddit dudes who fundamentally do not understand the purpose of alimony is mind-boggling. The idea that a woman would not be okay with being a SAHM with a guarantee that she would be destitute if she got divorced just doesn't seem to occur to them. Or maybe they just think it will guarantee that their wife will never leave them. But I'm guessing they just never think further than their own bank account.
|
# ? Aug 20, 2020 14:19 |
|
the R.E.D.D.I.T. system because of the implication
|
# ? Aug 20, 2020 14:22 |
|
vonnegutt posted:The amount of MRA / reddit dudes who fundamentally do not understand the purpose of alimony is mind-boggling. The idea that a woman would not be okay with being a SAHM with a guarantee that she would be destitute if she got divorced just doesn't seem to occur to them. Or maybe they just think it will guarantee that their wife will never leave them. But I'm guessing they just never think further than their own bank account.
|
# ? Aug 20, 2020 14:24 |
|
I've always been under the impression that a prenup protects prior assets, which I guess are protected regardless unless you mix them up with your partner's. I think some MRA are going to surprised to learn that assets gained during the marriage are a lot less ironclad. Like a house or any value the house appreciates. Or their retirement. The the bigger the kitty the more likely someone hires a lawyer who can pierce the prenup. Krispy Wafer fucked around with this message at 16:14 on Aug 20, 2020 |
# ? Aug 20, 2020 16:10 |
|
Soylent Pudding posted:I've seen other instances where guys think they can write a prenup that forfeits all their partners rights. Really the surprising bit is the social pushback Dan received. But I'm sure Dan is getting the validation he needs from the MRA subreddits to make up for it. Prenups that are obviously unreasonable like that aren't enforceable. Even if you sign 100% willingly with no coercion. In many states, a prenup isn't worth much because state laws about community property and divorce supersede any prenup. If Dan is real, then he should have done a small bit of research. A clause that forbids them from consulting a lawyer is literally one of the few things that will get a prenup completely dissolved without anything else in all 50 states. Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 17:13 on Aug 20, 2020 |
# ? Aug 20, 2020 17:09 |
|
Alan Smithee posted:the R.E.D.D.I.T. system
|
# ? Aug 20, 2020 18:38 |
|
Splicer posted:That jumped out at me yes. "I expect you to take a multi year career break and significantly hamper your future earning potential to raise my kids, ergo I would owe you less money" I think that's going further than they do. To me the buck stops at "she's not earning money and contributing to the household therefore she's not owed money". The logical thought for me is "we make these big decisions together and have an equal stake in the outcome". I have to assume the worst relationships have one person with no agency at all and therefore the person in power feels justified in taking everything for themselves. I chose this house, I chose my line of work and in successful, I chose the location to live, the other person chooses to stay at home and contribute no money, I could choose not to participate in a career too and we could both be broke.
|
# ? Aug 20, 2020 20:08 |
|
quote:Family Ruined By $100K Beanie Babies 'Investment'
|
# ? Aug 20, 2020 20:20 |
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Prenups that are obviously unreasonable like that aren't enforceable. Even if you sign 100% willingly with no coercion. IANAL but pretty much this. Generally a prenup in most states is like this: I agree that X property is mine and is not a marital asset. My company was established with a value of X before the marriage. You came into the marriage with an account of X and your whatever is worth Y, those things belong to you. Mostly just making establishing marital assets vs non-marital assets, and maybe like if you owned a millino dollar company the statement that wife cannot hold 50% voting ownership of it, but will be given X cash value within Y years. You can't just say "Welp you get nothing and no spousal support no child support and you unilaterally give up custody of all unborn children." A judge would look at that in most places and wouldn't even use it as TP because TP is worth more than a lovely prenup like that
|
# ? Aug 20, 2020 20:48 |
|
"As you can see in the prenup your honor, I defined my ex-wife as an asset of mine, so she has no rights! Checkmate!"
|
# ? Aug 20, 2020 21:01 |
|
tater_salad posted:You can't just say "Welp you get nothing and no spousal support no child support and you unilaterally give up custody of all unborn children." A judge would look at that in most places and wouldn't even use it as TP because TP is worth more than a lovely prenup like that My understanding is that if the prenup doesn’t describe what would be a reasonable post-marital settlement for support and asset division, it’s basically useless. The purpose of a pre-nup isn’t really to do things not permitted by the jurisdiction’s divorce law, but to pre-record the things you’re choosing to do within it so that things are clearer and smoother as a divorce is contemplated or enacted. The GMW comes from saving lawyer time (and stress), not from One Weird Trick Ex-Spouses Wish You Didn’t Know.
|
# ? Aug 20, 2020 21:36 |
|
SpartanIvy posted:"As you can see in the prenup your honor, I defined my ex-wife as an asset of mine, so she has no rights! Checkmate!" are there sovereign citizen prenups
|
# ? Aug 20, 2020 23:43 |
|
doingitwrong posted:are there sovereign citizen prenups I thought they were completely against the idea of joinder...
|
# ? Aug 21, 2020 00:19 |
|
doingitwrong posted:are there sovereign citizen prenups They would be glorious but who the hell would marry that.
|
# ? Aug 21, 2020 00:27 |
|
go read r/relationships, of course there are idiots who would marry that
|
# ? Aug 21, 2020 00:28 |
|
The copious red flags have gold fringe.
|
# ? Aug 21, 2020 00:33 |
|
I'm sure it's a correlation-not-causation thing, but my friends who had pre-nups have had FAR messier, more expensive divorces than those who didn't.
|
# ? Aug 21, 2020 00:44 |
|
GoGoGadgetChris posted:I'm sure it's a correlation-not-causation thing, but my friends who had pre-nups have had FAR messier, more expensive divorces than those who didn't.
|
# ? Aug 21, 2020 00:55 |
|
Invisible Clergy posted:AITA my sister lost millions in stocks
|
# ? Aug 21, 2020 00:58 |
|
Lmao you love to see it.
|
# ? Aug 21, 2020 01:27 |
|
Prenup lady also needs to split from the lawyer friend who blabbed to the friend group. Even if it was informal a lawyer disclosing a person's legal situation as gossip is hosed up.
College Rockout fucked around with this message at 01:39 on Aug 21, 2020 |
# ? Aug 21, 2020 01:29 |
|
[/quote] send her to WSB
|
# ? Aug 21, 2020 01:35 |
|
doingitwrong posted:are there sovereign citizen prenups I've actually seen something extremely close to this. It was a double whammy too - a sovereign citizen marriage and a non-white sovereign citizen. It was an older (50's) black guy who was in the middle of bankruptcy and recently went through a divorce. He had a 45+ minute meltdown that included the following: - He was never married to this woman because [his name] was married to this woman and [his name] has social security number XXX-XX-XXXX that was assigned to a corporation with his name, but not him. - He was a "Moor" and was only subject to Moorish law. The United States had no jurisdiction over Moorish travelers. - Lots of screaming about "colorable law" that has nothing to do with bankruptcy or divorce. - The garnishment of his wages was illegal because Moorish law forbids the payment of taxes or garnishments to foreign governments and the United States signed a treaty recognizing Moorish claims. - All the debts and claims against him in bankruptcy were actually claims against a corporation that he was merely a shareholder in and shareholders have no legal obligation to pay the debts of corporations they invest in. He had a laminated ID with the "Moorish Flag" that said he was a Moorish citizen that was not bound by any municipal, state, or federal laws of any nation.
|
# ? Aug 21, 2020 01:46 |
|
|
# ? Apr 28, 2024 05:52 |
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:I've actually seen something extremely close to this. It was a double whammy too - a sovereign citizen marriage and a non-white sovereign citizen. Oh good as an outlaw that means he's not protected by any laws either
|
# ? Aug 21, 2020 02:00 |