Thanks man, I appreciate that advice. I would follow it but I don't see how I can ask to "take a break" and expect her to chase me. It feels like she's checked out already and she has already moved on. I bet the best course of action is to go no contact on her. But honestly if she comes back in a month or two I think it would not be in my best interest to take her back after she went out to find new guys for a month.
When they turn, they turn fast
- Thread starter JDAM
- Start date
R.U.G.
Master Don Juan
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2018
- Messages
- 1,805
- Reaction score
- 1,220
If that is true, then it wasn't true love from her anyway. Her time was ticking, you seemed oppertune and she went for it. If a woman is able to throw a man away just for a pre-nup, then something is arye. Pre-nups can be negotiated to be somewhat fair. Where as there can be a sunset clause, protect only assets already earned and/or owned, etc. If she just says no, not a chance and walks away. Well, then, she never loved you in the first place. You were Mr. Just Good Enough. You should thank her and be on your way. However, if she contacts you later on, you may be able to get some make up sex out of it. Then, ghost. You'll then have the last laugh.
That's how I fee
That's how I feel: I should've been enough by myself. If she really felt the way she said she did, being married to me should have been enough. The pre-nup I offered her was pretty generous: 100k IRA or 50 k in cash instead of court ordered alimony And part of my retirement. Looks like she thinks she can do better and that tells me all I need to know. The way you put it as "Mr Good Enough" hurts but it made me see it is probably true.If that is true, then it wasn't true love from her anyway. Her time was ticking, you seemed oppertune and she went for it. If a woman is able to throw a man away just for a pre-nup, then something is arye. Pre-nups can be negotiated to be somewhat fair. Where as there can be a sunset clause, protect only assets already earned and/or owned, etc. If she just says no, not a chance and walks away. Well, then, she never loved you in the first place. You were Mr. Just Good Enough. You should thank her and be on your way. However, if she contacts you later on, you may be able to get some make up sex out of it. Then, ghost. You'll then have the last laugh.
R.U.G.
Master Don Juan
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2018
- Messages
- 1,805
- Reaction score
- 1,220
We've all been there; men and women. It's unfortunate, but most relationships seem temporary these days. Welcome to the 21st century. Before you enter into any legal contract, personal or otherwise, you need to make sure the terms of the deal are fair and equitable (for you). After all, as you probably already know, a marriage license IS a binding business contract. It's not to be taken lightly.
BeExcellent
Master Don Juan
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2015
- Messages
- 4,732
- Reaction score
- 6,726
- Age
- 55
You're welcome. It's a bummer. She thought her value was so high that you would abandon your desire for a pre-nup. She didn't expect you to stick to your principles because you really legitimately NEED one.
You did the right thing here. You have to watch out for the interests of yourself & your daughter as top priority now.
She might not be after your "stuff" but it doesn't matter. She doesn't have kids and hasn't been married so she doesn't have that frame of reference.
Heal. You met her. You'll meet others.
EDIT: Get a trust set up in any case. You are more bullet proof if you set it up without being in a relationship that is official. It avoids probate & discourages partners who are opportunistic.
Last edited:
Thank you. Reading this makes me feel better. It's hard to accept that someone i loved (and if I'm honest I still love her) decided to opt out of a life together over money. I trusted her, I was up front with her from jump. And this is what I get in return. Thanks again for your insight.
Yeah it does speak for itself, and yeah I agree, it does look like I dodged a bullet. If she was willing to walk away now when she didn't get exactly what she wanted, why wouldn't she do that after she was married? I wish there was a shortcut to the time to heal but I've been though this before and I know that just isn't the case.
95 % of men do not know how to lead in relationships (see @Atom Smasher posts about leadership and being a servant leader) I was married without a pre-nup and was NOT ass raped in divorce court) I had a lot to offer including military benefits that she did not go after..I chalk this up to my leadership in the marriage (along with boldness) even though it failed.I am not saying this would have been the case with you.Life is full of risks we take everyday.You could have missed out on a very good thing as well.
Last edited:
Sorry man, that has nothing to do with 'leadership' in marriage (which I'm not doubting) that she didn't go after your stuff in divorce. You luckily ended up with a woman who either had more self-respect than most to not leech off someone else's hard work or someone totally naive. There are plenty of examples in the world where all kinds of 'leaders' and 'alphas' got @ss raped in the divorce courts, state laws don't give a crap who/what you are and most women will take everything they can possibly get through the court system.
Back to the OP- I also think you dodged a bullet...similar thing happened to me. If she wanted marriage to truly be with you then she would've had no issues with signing a pre-nup.
BeExcellent
Master Don Juan
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2015
- Messages
- 4,732
- Reaction score
- 6,726
- Age
- 55
This has less to do with the OP. It's more a food for thought type thing.
Good women are not scheming & calculating on the front end as some here seem to think. There are certainly opportunistic women who do...but if you as a man are screening well you'll avoid those types.
In marriage women are the ones who have to bear the potentially dangerous risks of pregnancy & childbirth. In addition women often fall out of the workforce to nurse the baby (again something men cannot do) and babies/very young children cannot raise themselves. The most stable families have a parent at home. This is usually mom.
The withdrawal from the workforce has an effect on a woman's ability to earn income. The courts recognize this. This is part of the reason the courts appear to favor women. In most marriages it is the woman who sacrifices her earning potential over a period of years. My mother met my father in law school. My father, once they married, insisted on her being a stay at home wife & mother. They were married 20 years. Let's say the average attorney only makes 100K per year (that amount was low even while they were married.). Over a 20 year period that is 2 million dollars in income under reasonable assumptions that my mother gave up. Re-entering the work force after 2 decades creates a real financial hardship on the stay at home parent.
In my marriage my husband was out of the work force for 10 years. That made the most financial sense since I earn a high income. He raised kids and I sent lots of breast milk home via Fed Ex on dry ice.
Guess who was at risk financially in my divorce? Me as the breadwinner supporting a spouse who spent a decade not working.
The best families I see are those that are traditional & nuclear. I.e. Dad works, mom stays home & raises children. The best example I know personally is a doctor locally. The wife was a Rhodes scholar and daughter of a doctor. She herself is extremely intelligent and had planned to become a physician herself. On her year in England she met her husband and they married. They had their first child 9 months later & 6 more after that. They have now been married 25+ years. The wife gave up her career ambitions to be his wife & a mother. They have no pre-nup and they remain happily married. He is tall & handsome. She is a beautiful woman, and looks in her early 30s. She is 5'6" or so, fit, athletic & thin. She weighs probably 125 lbs. She has 7 children & looks like she has never had any!
But think about the potential income she gave up if she had become a doctor herself. Millions of dollars over a 25+ year period.
I mention these things because THAT is more how good women think. They realize they will sacrifice their ability to support themselves financially if the choose to be a wife and mother rather than a career woman. That is more the rationale behind unwillingness to sign a pre-nup.
It isn't so much about scheming to strip some guy of his resources. It's a sense that men really don't grasp the sacrifice financially that women (especially those with high earning potential) make to be a wife & mother. And if a woman loves you she will make that sacrifice gladly. She has to trust you as the man to handle the financial burden in that case. She wants you to trust her back. The pre-nup can feel like a man doesn't trust or understand what a woman (a worthwhile woman) gives up to be his wife & to mother his children nor the health risks that are involved.
Good women are not scheming & calculating on the front end as some here seem to think. There are certainly opportunistic women who do...but if you as a man are screening well you'll avoid those types.
In marriage women are the ones who have to bear the potentially dangerous risks of pregnancy & childbirth. In addition women often fall out of the workforce to nurse the baby (again something men cannot do) and babies/very young children cannot raise themselves. The most stable families have a parent at home. This is usually mom.
The withdrawal from the workforce has an effect on a woman's ability to earn income. The courts recognize this. This is part of the reason the courts appear to favor women. In most marriages it is the woman who sacrifices her earning potential over a period of years. My mother met my father in law school. My father, once they married, insisted on her being a stay at home wife & mother. They were married 20 years. Let's say the average attorney only makes 100K per year (that amount was low even while they were married.). Over a 20 year period that is 2 million dollars in income under reasonable assumptions that my mother gave up. Re-entering the work force after 2 decades creates a real financial hardship on the stay at home parent.
In my marriage my husband was out of the work force for 10 years. That made the most financial sense since I earn a high income. He raised kids and I sent lots of breast milk home via Fed Ex on dry ice.
Guess who was at risk financially in my divorce? Me as the breadwinner supporting a spouse who spent a decade not working.
The best families I see are those that are traditional & nuclear. I.e. Dad works, mom stays home & raises children. The best example I know personally is a doctor locally. The wife was a Rhodes scholar and daughter of a doctor. She herself is extremely intelligent and had planned to become a physician herself. On her year in England she met her husband and they married. They had their first child 9 months later & 6 more after that. They have now been married 25+ years. The wife gave up her career ambitions to be his wife & a mother. They have no pre-nup and they remain happily married. He is tall & handsome. She is a beautiful woman, and looks in her early 30s. She is 5'6" or so, fit, athletic & thin. She weighs probably 125 lbs. She has 7 children & looks like she has never had any!
But think about the potential income she gave up if she had become a doctor herself. Millions of dollars over a 25+ year period.
I mention these things because THAT is more how good women think. They realize they will sacrifice their ability to support themselves financially if the choose to be a wife and mother rather than a career woman. That is more the rationale behind unwillingness to sign a pre-nup.
It isn't so much about scheming to strip some guy of his resources. It's a sense that men really don't grasp the sacrifice financially that women (especially those with high earning potential) make to be a wife & mother. And if a woman loves you she will make that sacrifice gladly. She has to trust you as the man to handle the financial burden in that case. She wants you to trust her back. The pre-nup can feel like a man doesn't trust or understand what a woman (a worthwhile woman) gives up to be his wife & to mother his children nor the health risks that are involved.
I understand your point of view but a pre-nup is simply a contract where *both* parties are putting their conditions down and agreeing to abiding by those conditions. So a pre-nup doesn't mean women get nothing or men keep everything. It's whatever you both agree to.
As for women giving up potential income, that rarely happens these days at least not in the high cost of living areas, because both parties work. Also thanks to the mandatory maternity leaves in most states women can't lose their jobs/title/pay etc.
The thing is that before I marry a woman she's supporting herself and if I didn't marry her she would've supported herself indefinitely as I would have myself so why should one be liable for supporting the other party forever because they married? Marriage is a partnership that should benefit both parties and when it ends two people should go back to the way things were before marriage. As for the gender issue, consider that that most divorces are filed by women, so I see very little benefit for a man and only financial rape down the road. It's sad because my views have changed 180 degree since my divorce. I used to have a very high regard for marriage, I believed in monogamy etc but after getting emotionally and financially raped I no longer see marriage as anything that would benefit the man, at least not in the western society.
As for women giving up potential income, that rarely happens these days at least not in the high cost of living areas, because both parties work. Also thanks to the mandatory maternity leaves in most states women can't lose their jobs/title/pay etc.
The thing is that before I marry a woman she's supporting herself and if I didn't marry her she would've supported herself indefinitely as I would have myself so why should one be liable for supporting the other party forever because they married? Marriage is a partnership that should benefit both parties and when it ends two people should go back to the way things were before marriage. As for the gender issue, consider that that most divorces are filed by women, so I see very little benefit for a man and only financial rape down the road. It's sad because my views have changed 180 degree since my divorce. I used to have a very high regard for marriage, I believed in monogamy etc but after getting emotionally and financially raped I no longer see marriage as anything that would benefit the man, at least not in the western society.
BeExcellent
Master Don Juan
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2015
- Messages
- 4,732
- Reaction score
- 6,726
- Age
- 55
I agree Hank. I'm not getting married again either for the same reasons you noted because I was the high earning breadwinner. So I completely get that part of it.
However the maternity leave does NOT last that long. Some men prefer full time stay at home mothers for their children for the duration of child rearing (years). My dad required that of my mom for example. And I grew up in a high income high cost of living area. Maternity leave doesn't cover that at all.
And the self-employed, like me, don't get maternity leave at all. The state or gov didn't help me. Not one cent. And that's OK. I made enough to afford everything. I had to sock away funds to support the family for the 2 months I physically couldn't work. And I had to get back to work ASAP so we could eat. So maternity leave doesn't always apply.
My purpose was to shed light on what many unmarried young women expect because they remain idealistic about marriage. They don't realize how tough it can really be and I don't think OPs fiancé understood his pragmatic rationale for requiring the pre-nup.
The irony here is that the better a woman's background is the more she will hold the perspective I put forth.
I assure you the beautiful daughters of the physician and his wife are going to want a marriage like their parents. They will gladly be wives & mothers & ride or die life partners. And they will likely dump a man who requires a pre-nup for the reasons I noted.
As I said its food for thought.
Last edited:
R.U.G.
Master Don Juan
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2018
- Messages
- 1,805
- Reaction score
- 1,220
Very true. As with anything worth anything in life, it requires risk. Bold and leading is one thing, however, if you have a psycho ex (male or female), that is completely another. Not every man (or woman - I.E. Mel B/Scary Spice) who are bold will still be able to protect their assets from law.
R.U.G.
Master Don Juan
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2018
- Messages
- 1,805
- Reaction score
- 1,220
That's all well and good, however, this is not necessarily a gender issue; at least where I'm coming from. The lesser earning spouse, male or female, can tend to marry up and get into a good deal in terms of finance. When things go bad and they want to exit, they want to know that there's something in it at the end; usually not a fair an equitable piece from what I am told. As for women taking time out of the work force to raise THEIR kids, well, that's part of the job. Be it the woman or the man, extreme sacrifice is placed on both; but in different ways. While breast milk is better and preferred, formula has been an option for decades. The fact is, just like you did, the LESSOR EARNING SPOUSE/PARTNER should stay and raise the kids until school age. In addition, 21st century couples, in general, do not raise their kids nowadays... Daycare does. I think this is one of the biggest reasons why society is heading the wrong way. Parents should raise kids, not daycare. Feminists has made homemaking a bad word for women nowadays.
BeExcellent
Master Don Juan
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2015
- Messages
- 4,732
- Reaction score
- 6,726
- Age
- 55
I agree 100%. I think it is a shame for example that Home Economics class has disappeared from the curriculum. In my day there was Home Economics offered both in middle school AND high school. I also agree strongly that children are best raised by a parent.
Being a good wife has been denigrated since I was in college (jokes about women seeking MRS degrees)...and the dirty little secret is many men who married those women who were raised valuing being a wife? They are the ones in thriving marriages with intact families.
There are indeed feminist agenda based imperatives that contribute to poor outcomes.
I do still see intact healthy families who teach the value of being a good spouse and good parent at home. My ex and I do our best to teach this as well even though we are divorced.
What I see in my community where I spend half my time in small town America (as opposed to my other residence in a major metro) is a tendency toward these traditional roles and values that is selected FOR within the greater (obviously pretty conservative) community.
The most liberal places there are the schools, where the young people get more confused than not with all the gender fluidity (WTF is THAT????). I am stunned at some of the things my 14 year old daughter hears about at school in the name of "tolerance". It's a sizable job simply to educate a teen about traditional roles and their value in such a hostile environment. But I keep at it. Takes time. So I'm not working much right now.
And that's OK. Been the game plan all along.
If you currently have too many women chasing you, calling you, harassing you, knocking on your door at 2 o'clock in the morning... then I have the simple solution for you.
Just read my free ebook 22 Rules for Massive Success With Women and do the opposite of what I recommend.
This will quickly drive all women away from you.
And you will be able to relax and to live your life in peace and quiet.
My only point with the maternity leave was that they don't in fact have to leave their careers to have a child, legally they get that right to keep the career/job while they're on a maternity leave.
Of course, it doesn't apply to every situation as you pointed out but again those exceptions can still be made part of the the prenup e.g. 'If both parties decide, as married couples, in a written agreement, singed and notarized, that the wife is to stay at home to raise kid(s) then the husband shall carry the burden of providing financial support, per the conditions in the said agreement, should the marriage ends'.
A good friend of mine and his fiance' signed a pre-nup recently- they both wanted it too because they're both successful in each of their careers and they don't want to be liable for each other financially if a divorce happens. They've been together for 8yrs already. I think the only people who are opposed to the idea are the ones that think they can benefit from it should the divorce happens. All the other things can be made part of the agreement to make it fair as I mentioned the example above.
BeExcellent
Master Don Juan
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2015
- Messages
- 4,732
- Reaction score
- 6,726
- Age
- 55
That is a fair arrangement your friend and his fiancé made. I would do the same if I were to remarry precisely because I have assets to shield and those assets have children those assets must fund. No way I would risk endangering my ability to provide for my children. Same as the OP.
Very traditional young women may have a hard time wrapping their head around the concept...especially if they have parents who steadfastly have remained married and built a life as a team. The PARENTS will advise against it, especially if they are traditional and conservative. They see marriage as permanent and take it seriously. Often they raise children including women, who hold the same value system.
So red pill men who find themselves involved with such women will eventually will face a tough choice. Take the risk or lose a really good woman. I don't envy you guys on that one.
The chances of the marriage succeeding, especially in this day and age, are far lower than the marriage failing - for many reasons you're well aware of.
That's one hell of a risk I don't think I'd be willing to take. Do you think what you said applies to the younger generation as well?
During your younger days, wouldn't you be open to pragmatic arguments if explained properly? Or was it a complete and utter non-negotiable?
i.e. having a fair prenup that'd make sense for both sides
MatureDJ
Master Don Juan
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2006
- Messages
- 11,295
- Reaction score
- 4,664
I would simply say that the marriage paradigm just didn't work for me the way it was supposed to, and I don't want to have such legal entanglements ever again. And you have a daughter who could inherit everything from you, so that's even a better excuse for avoid this entanglement.
R.U.G.
Master Don Juan
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2018
- Messages
- 1,805
- Reaction score
- 1,220
Agree as well on your retort. Marriage should be a partnership with a common goal in mind. However, nowadays, this is not the case and should be avoided at all costs. A person can always find another partner, but can they recoup the money, time and assets lost in a divorce? The only one's who win are the lawyers; I hate family law attorneys. I was hoping President Trump would had signed an executive order to have all of them blindfolded and shot.
@BeExcellent, since I believe we're in a similar business, real estate, if you're assets and income were cut by 60% due to equitable distribution and all that other crap, would you be able to rebuild your company (or companies) back to 100%? I know it would probably destroy me financially; if not mentally as well. I am not even counting the emotional and legal toll that a divorce puts on a person. I just couldn't put myself through it again. As @DEEZEDBRAH always says, there's always another woman around the corner. Horrible way to look at it right now, but that is how the family court system works.
