Good video worth a watch... if you don't want to just answer the question based on what you think.
I'd love to see if someone can give a good argument to what he is saying. If you think ''well if your marrying someone it should be for life... you should trust them!''... ok... but why should ALL of the risk of losing money be on the MAN. All it does is empower women when they are married... its like having an insurance if things don't go great. I'm not going to discuss custody of children that's another matter. By the way courts can and have over turned prenups if it is really unfair on the woman... so there isn't a risk of her being screwed over and having to survive alone as a single parent with no support.
Do you think it is right/correct if a partner earns more than the other they should be allowed to get a marriage prenup?
Women... if you want to prove you love them... what is wrong with them keeping their own assets. Why should men have to almost give a huge deposit and if the marriage goes wrong give that over... if you want to know why men take a long time to propose... yeah that's a huge part of the reason.
- Yes (gender equality is a great thing)
- No (men should have to risk their $ to prove their love... meanwhile women risk nothing)
Most Helpful Girl
I think prenups can be a good thing (but not just for men as they are not always the ones who earn more). However, I also think that it is right that 'it is a lot more common for men to pay alimony than women, especially in cases when the woman stayed home with the children' as they are compensating for the sacrifice of unemployment and the fact it may then, after divorce, be difficult for that person to find a job compared to the 'bread winner' who already has one. I'm not saying that this only works one way, if the situation is a stay at home dad, then i would expect them to receive compensation for their future job difficulties also.
Most Helpful Guy
There's really no such thing as nonprenup marriage is for life.
There will be contractual laws in place if a divorce happens.
You can have the standard set or a custom set. But there's no 'none of the above'.
The standard set basically assumes if one person earns more than the other it was because of the noble sacrifice of the low income earner. If that's not the case the standard contract is absurd.