[pasted from another similar question]
There wouldn't be so much noise about this, if there weren't SOME decently good answers. Here are a few.
Disclaimer: I have no personal stake here -- I'm the primary earner in my marriage, and, in fact, we do not have a pre-nuptial agreement.
--
#1,
Far most importantly, you are going to see an unavoidable response bias here -- regardless of how (un) common this actual view is among actual women.
Imagine a situation in which 19 of every 20 women (in yr hypothetical, in which women are the lesser earners) are perfectly willing to sign pre-nups, and it's just that 1 out of 20 who isn't.
1 out of 20.
5 percent.
Okay.
Still... even in this case.. who's going to make BY FAR most of the noise? Most of the racket? Most of the whining?
You got it.
All of the shrillest cries are going to come from people who feel wronged, dude. This is pretty much a universal feature of human nature.
You see the same thing with toll-free product hotlines. Even if 99.9 percent of buyers are happy with a product, the hotline is still going to get mostly complaints. Why? Because... people who feel wronged make noise. Happy people don't make noise.
I mean, srsly. Do you think women who are perfectly willing to sign pre-nupts are gna take to the internet in droves to write passionate opinions about that?
As if.
I mean, honestly, this might not even be the majority view, by now. Most of my girlfriends are at least somewhat ok with pre-nupts, and, of my clients who have enough wealth to worry about protecting (and who are willing to open up about this kind of stuff), ALL have pre-nupts.
Moreover, there's no way to ascertain how common they are, because they aren't actually filed with the court. They are executed outside of court, witnessed, and then kept by the parties and their counsel -- but they don't ever see the inside of a courtroom unless they are actually litigated. Therefore it's impossible to know how common they actually are.
--
#2,
Something you should definitely think of, because, honestly, it's something MEN usually bring up.
This whole notion that a woman's younger years are her "best" years.
That.
That's certainly a thing in terms of fertility (in fact, you'd probably be shocked just how young a woman's most fertile years ARE, but, that's another topic for another day)... but, a lot of y'all make it sound like a woman is virtually worthless after her 30th birthday.
(contd)
... Ironically, a lot of the men who are MOST insistent on pre-nupts -- even if they have relatively little to protect, and, in the most delicious of ironies, even if they'll ultimately screw themselves out of getting alimony/support from HER someday -- are also the men who are most obnoxiously strident about this whole "a woman's best years" thing.
The same men who say with straight faces that women should be trying to get married at 19-20, even as they're playing the field into their late 20's or early 30's.
I mean, if you are gna buy into this whole idea that a woman's younger years are her "best" years, then, it makes a lot of sense that she should rail against the idea of a pre-nupt.
That whole "best years" concept isn't codified into the law at all -- of course it isn't, since it can't be -- so, if you buy that concept, then you'll think that any legally "equitable" divorce is actually going to gravely shortchange the woman. (contd)
I mean, you can't have it both ways. Either you buy the whole a-woman's-best-years idea AND buy the corresponding idea that she should be compensated disproportionally in the case of divorce, OR you toss out both the baby and the bathwater. You can't have that cake and also eat it.
#3,
this isn't just a woman thing, but, a lot of women -- just like a lot of people in general -- distrust lawyers and the legal system.
When you bring in legal counsel to execute a pre-nupt, suddenly yr getting shyster lawyers involved in what was previously a primarily civil/religious arrangement.
For women who distrust AND feel overwhelmed by the legal system... this is, well, distrustful and overwhelming. Nawmean?
Like, YOU say it's just to protect yr future and yr property equitably -- and that may well be what you actually mean -- but, she sees all this legal machinery being rolled onto the stage, and she thinks, oh shit, what am I getting myself into. (contd)
Ya know?
It's the same feeling people get when they execute all those contracts when they're buying a car.
Some people are perfectly fine with that, and can go through all those long-ass forms from top to bottom and feel perfectly comfortable the whole time -- but others just get overwhelmed and don't want to deal with it. Either they'll pawn the whole decision off on someone else, or make a poor rash decision, or else back out entirely.
Same thing with marriage once that whole legal apparatus gets involved.
This is true even though the woman gets her own counsel. It's still super overwhelming. In fact, for a lot of people, that can make it seem even MORE overwhelming -- if they have their own counsel, but they still don't quite understand what's going on, or why certain clauses look the way they do, or how.
The whole thing just starts to leave a bitter taste in everyone's mouth.
(contd)
And also
#4,
Most men REALLY do not approach this in a very good way.
Yes, it's a legal contract, but, most men approach it like a legal contract -- and that's exactly what should not be done, here.
I mean, guys should really study the whole presentation angle, here. There are ways in which (1) this can be made into a normal, unremarkable, part of the getting-married process -- just like signing the marriage license -- and/or (2) it can be presented as a way to genuinely make the union stronger, by giving both parties an equal sense of resolve and security.
BUT... yeah, that isn't how the party with more at stake usually approaches it.
Usually, that party approaches the whole issue like a prison inmate guarding food scraps, and so the whole subject becomes exactly that endearing. And that whole thing just builds on itself, every time it gets talked
about.
Hopefully, all this makes sense. Again, no personal horse in this race, but, should all seem reasonable.
It isn't irony if the guy asks for a prenup if he knows that he would be okay after a divorce with the agreement. A prenuptial agreement is a product of feminism. Thanks to feminists and supporters of feminists, women are able to get jobs that were banned from them before. They can vote and hold jobs. The purpose of alimony was to protect women because "they are of the fairer sex and therefore cannot work outside the home." Since now more women attend college more than men, it is fairer to say that they are capable of holding their own. Men know this because they were taught that women are just as capable as men. Telling your fiance that a pre-nup is offensive goes against that feminist teaching that they have received. You call hypocrisy in men saying women should marry at 19-20 but are playing the field at 30 is ludicrous. However, hypocrisy among feminists saying that they demand alimony and yet equal treatment is real.
The best way to approach a pre-nup, is when you start to get serious, and marriage is now a viable option, instead of a week before. Decide together what your future is going to be and what would happen if it doesn't work. Be rational about it, so when you sign the prenup or don't sign the prenup, it will not be a surprise. Of course, feelings could change, but once you decide yes for a prenup, it should be a sealed deal, and not change.
@kstout6
Again, the irony is that the men who yell the loudest about how a woman's 20s are "her best years" are often the same men who insist most brazenly that women should get nothing upon divorce.
That's the irony.
**IF** we as a society are gna buy into this whole "best years" thing -- and if women are marrying young enough -- then it totally stands to reason that there should be *some* sort of compensation for that intangible loss.
Look -- Personally, I am on the same page as you here. I think that, before getting married, couples should be REQUIRED to talk to a legal counselor and REQUIRED to execute this kind of agreement. Because all too often they just stick their fingers in their ears and let the state decide for them.
That's really the biggest problem with it right now -- it's not REQUIRED, so, there's already a huge emotional barrier erected against even bringing up the topic.
I don't understand what you mean by a woman's best years are her younger years. If you mean looks then the guys that only go for a girl that is based solely on looks is unfortunately misguided, for looks are a depreciating value. What men like me are worried about is the future, we know our looks will fade with time. However, love grows through experience, not looks. I love my wife more than when I was dating her. Hell, when I fart, she laughs. When she farts, I laugh. If there are men like that, then they need to grow up. There are, yes, but I don't associate myself with aholes. I try to think the best in my sex, what the best has to offer, and try to emulate that. I never ran around, I only had one partner, she is my wife. I am not perfect, we din't have a perfect marriage, and there was a lot of growing up that had to be done during our first years of marriage. If I had done a prenup or not, would not have mattered, because even in those bad years when...
... with my wife, I would have never left her with nothing, because of the responsibility I had as being her husband. I never took for granted the vows I made, when I married her I consider them sacred. I think because of that respect I had, it helped me realize to be a better husband. Because of the problems I had, I felt humbled, thinking that I am not that great of a man or a husband. I know a ton of men who are better than me, yet I do not believe what you say that men get pre-nupts. I believe if I were to marry again, I would require a pre-nupt, because there would be no drawn out legal battle, no more pain than it should merit. It may be a killer in romance, but let's face it, that puppy-love romance does not last long anyways. What lasts is respect and the years of self-less duty to your wife or husband and the love forged in working together to build your lives together. Love like this is not easy to come by and it requires a lot of humility, experience and work...
... This why I do not believe that men who want pre-nups are the same that say the woman's best years are in their 20s. It is as if you are saying that men do not appreciate experience. Looks are candy, not experience is nourishing. Kids like candy, but adults tend to eat better. Don't you think that men would not want someone their age? I never liked 18 or 19 year olds. Most of them still have a high school mentality, a complete turn-off for me. I have casually dated women who are older than me, and honestly, I prefer older than younger because of the tendency of experience.
Sorry for the long 3 posts. I know that we are on the same page, I just don't like the generalizations, because they are not fair.
I wouldn't sign prenup if he had more to start, let's say he owned a full home first before meeting me. This is why, I plan to have kids with said guy. My whole thought pattern being what if it doesn't work out? 50% of marriages fail, then what if we have kids and sign a prenup and he cheats. I'm stuck raising x kids with no money, no house. Fuck that, I want half the shit so I can put a down payment on a new home for myself and not be fucked for life being a single parent. This happened to my mom and she raised 3 kids broke as fuck her whole life. He never cheated but he was an abuser. There's no way I'd want to end up like my mom, you need that security as a women. If he wanted a prenup he'd get no kids, that way if we split I wouldn't be in a fucked situation. I would be ok with a prenup with stipulations like if I cheat I get nothing haha I already know I wouldn't so Im good with that. The situation I'm in now I'm saving for a house and have a good chunk put away. If I met a guy I'd make him sign something, not giving away half my house and for the same reason. If we had kids and split he'd be free to do as he pleases and I'd be the one stuck so I'd want to have the house. I realize I do have mad trust issues but I don't do anything in a relationship that's deal breaking. I've never cheated, I don't hit my bfs, I'm not loud and argumentative. My worst habits are more minor so I feel like if I split up its going be because HE did something. If he was mad rich, millionaire style I'd be content with a prenup saying if we split I get a house out of it, normal 3 bedroom style home for me and the kids and I don't give a fuck about taking his cars toys etc.
"Infidelity clauses" -- along with other so-called "lifestyle" clauses -- are on shaky legal ground.
To put it simply, if you think you can put X penalty into a pre-nuptial agreement for cheating... well, think again.
In most parts of the US that's doubtful. In California, the courts have explicitly ruled NOPE.
caselaw.findlaw.com/.../1076075.html
Not to mention the problems with evidence -- and the problems with how you'd define "cheating". (Sexting? Oral? Vaginal sex? How would you PROVE these things had happened in a court of law?)
Nope.
When you hear about that sort of thing with Michael Douglas, it's all for show. You can't put that into a real contract.
And, if you try, it could very possibly get the WHOLE AGREEMENT thrown out in court, too.
@redeyemindtricks yah for sure, they'd just have to deal with no prenup then haha I would never set myself up to be screwed over by a man, ever. I watched my mom go through that and if she was able to get something out of it she wouldn't have been fucked over her whole life. My mom did things the traditional way too. Waited for marriage to have sex, had the white picket fence, was a stay at home mom and then he turned into an abusive drunk and she's the one who got the shit end of the stick after it was said and done.
Well, obviously it's rather unromantic to make an agreement on how you're going to divide up and break a marriage that hasn't even occurred yet, so you can hardly blame someone for their lack of enthusiasm on the subject, but unfortunately it's a practical agreement to consider due to the state of marriages these days. Protects you and your spouse.
I think men and women who object to prenups are mainly just upset by the implication that they should plan for a divorce at the outset, or they're offended that their spouse would think they'd take advantage in the event of one, etc. What they have to remember is that, realistically marriage isn't always all sunshine and roses, and this is a security measure for both of you, and your marriage. It's also one you can make together instead of letting the State dictate what it would be by default.
marry me anon
someone tag me only if she responds with a yes lol
Thanks! Prenups are rational and recommended. Just wanted to also add some different angles and perspective to the usual, boorish "they're all gold diggers, that's why!!" rhetoric.
Men want prenups because they hear horror stories of some guy (or even know some guy) whose wife left him and took everything, leaving him broken and destitute.
Women are offended by the idea of a prenup because they see it as a guy saying he does not trust her, and if he does not trust her, she doesn't see why she should stay with him. Considering how highly I value trust and loyalty, I want to sympathize with those women. But I can't. Thanks to no-fault divorce laws, some 80% of divorce are instigated by women, and if no prenup is signed, a guy can have everything he has, all his worth, even things, like a house or car, bought and paid for before he ever knew she existed, taken from him.
In a world where a woman can sue for a divorce for NO REASON OTHER THAN she wants a divorce (no abuse, no cheating, no 'irrevocable differences,' simply her desire for a divorce) a signed prenup is the only thing a man has that guarantees him the fact that should his wife ever decide to leave him, he won't be spending months living on friend's couches and homeless shelters, trying to figure out how to rebuild.
Very sad, very true.
And when all the damn thing says is that what is his is his and she has no right to take his property from him in the event their relationship ends, it really does not seem an unfair thing for him to ask for. When you consider the prevalence of divorce rates, and the prevalence of men losing their livelihoods in such a case, the only reason I can think of for a woman to be upset that a man might want an insurance property against such an act is because she planned to take him to the cleaners in the first place.
A prenup is one of the few things a man can do to make sure that he does not get completely raped by the system, should their marriage end for any reason. The fact that a woman would deny him that is frightening. And you need only look to the (very few) cases of men pursuing their ex wives for alimony or other support to see how quickly these women strive to strike down such things, once it becomes clear to them that it can be used against them, and not ONLY against men.
Because somehow materialism is affront to them. I think any independent individual has the right safeguard their own wealth regardless of however deep a relationship is. After all a relationship isn't everything in life.
Opinion
30Opinion
Generally the idea of marriage "was" to unite together as one till death do us part (without killing your spouse). That's how it has been with my parents, was with my grandparents, great grandparents, and so on... You're suppose to get married because you love them and you want to spend the rest of your life with them. Yes, that even means supporting your man even if he loses his job for a year or even two. What's mine is yours and what's yours is mine and together we will find a way to get through whatever life hits us with. Loyalty is so important, though often rarely seen in today's relationships. Surprise marriage has a lot to do with giving and selflessness. These are concepts a lot of people don't seem to understand today. More than half of this generation grew up in broken homes where their mom divorced their dad over selfish reasons, and then extorted him like a common criminal. Many women expect a man to provide for her monetarily, and the moment he comes on hard times (that's life), she not only abandons him, she tries to take half of what he has and run off with it and then use the court system to exploit him like some sweatshop child in the 3rd world for the rest of his life. I guess they missed the concept of love somewhere in the entire deal. So now you have a bunch of narcissistic selfish little assholes running around demanding the world, and not willing to sacrifice anything for their partner. Marriage has become robotic... It's become corporate like, with all the backstabbing politics... Many women are in it for material. Men that choose to get involved in marriages say wow this is fucked up, I need to protect myself. It's a cluster fuck for the large majority of people... It doesn't need to be this way... This is a huge cultural mistake.
Voted A.
Usually women believe that a man asking for a pre-nup indicates lack of trust on his part. I call bullshit. Just because a person is very healthy or a good driver, does not mean he/she shouldn't get medical or vehicle insurance. Besides, the person who earns lesser tends to benefit the most in case of a divorce, and most women refuse to marry men who earn less than them. So if a woman is looking ONLY for men who earn more than her, and is also against a pre-nup, it means she plans to take away his house, car, kids and half his shit, if and when there is a divorce.
I'd argue that a woman wanting marriage also partly indicates a lack of trust due to that they require a legal binding to "keep their partner with them".
They think it's against love because ONE signature and bureaucratic paper is somehow a declaration of love, but TWO signatures and bureaucratic papers are just too much and unromantic!
Lmao. I think they're just hypocritical and want all they can get with their divorce.
Exactly this. Those women know what they're doing, and are just setting themselves up in case the marriage goes south.
Marriage is about " we" not "I" . So " what's his is his and what's mine is mine", You are going into the marriage with a selfish mindset already. Keep in mind it's 2016, women are doing better in the workforce than men specifically white men. So, we will have more too loose in this day and age. And marriage isn't a modern thing lol. this shit has been around since the beginning of time. But it's 2016, people only get in relationships and marriages for the title anyway. Love and romance is dead. But I mean most women have no desire for marriage so it doesn't matter really.
I haven't really seen this commonality. However, I think a lot of people may be against it because it can cause a lot of problems when it comes to jointly owned things, things bought for one partner by the other, and so on.
Also, there are many cases where there's a divorce and one partly actually wants to provide the other now ex-partner with something but can't because of the legal obligations made in the prenup.
Besides that, marriage is suppose to signify to separate beings becoming one, meaning what's his is hers and what's hers is his. They're suppose to symbolically become one mind body and soul.
Another possible thing could possibly be fear of not having anything because they became too reliant on the other partner.
As far as hypocrisy, I voted no, but I think it really just depends on the circumstanced.
Prenups protect both the spouses against any loss assets during divorce...
Hell if I have purchased a house on my own money and if we divorce then I am not giving my house just because I married her... Why should I?
That's why what's mine is mine simple as that and i have a right to keep my property...
Any women who doesn't wanna sign the Prenup is just a gold digger... or maybe she thinks that a
Her man doesn't trust her but in the end... Any woman who really loves a man and is in for love not money then she would happily sign the prenup...
I think a lot of women plan on quitting their jobs and staying at home after they get married, and they are afraid that their man might leave them, and then they would (gasp) have to actually go back to work and support themselves. Why else would one object to a prenup? If you don't plan on using him for his money, just sign it. Then if you make more money than he does down the road, you can just sit back and smile.
The norm seems to be that prenups protect your stuff before marriage and then split assets attained by the couple 50/50 after the marriage. So you keep what you got before and split everything you got after the marriage. Of course you can make a prenup that makes you keep whatever you got at any time as long as the checks from work came out to only your name.
Im 18 and I come from a rich family. I would not marry any woman if she did not sign a prenup. I have millions to lose in a marriage, if she refused to sign a prenup that shows she only would want my money so good riddance!
How is it fair that if i divorced a woman she gets to steal my dad's millions, money she didn't earn. I want to share my families wealth with a woman but I dont want her to steal it from me.
If you have money to lose in a marriage sign a prenup, its not against love its protecting and securing your marriage if things end ugly. Marriage is not for the rich, unless a prenup is signed!!
I think there's a way to not mix martial funds with any family $, even w/o a prenup, if you want to google.
I wouldn't say it is hypocritical if women don't want it, but I still it's the smartest choice. However my boyfriend doesn't like the idea of signing a pre-nup but I'm all for it. I just don't want to someday have to give half of everything to someone who might have cheated on me or left me for someone else which is a reality..
The pre-nup shouldn't even need to exist as a separate entity in today's world. It should be part of the marriage register.
It is in my country. The prenub-thing is standard and people have to actively change it to married with shared goods if they want to.
I could see why they wouldn't like it. It gives off the idea that he can't trust her. And in that moment she doesn't believe she ever will and would never want to. So for her love to say, "i trust you, but just in case I can't I need you to sign this paper.".
Not saying I agree, but I get it.
If one person has assets that they don't want randomly given away to a gold-digging ex-spouse by a judge in case of divorce, it makes sense. Spouses who miss child support/alimony can end up in jail, even if the ex-spouse is a deadbeat loser. A former co-worker is stuck giving his ex-wife alimony for the rest of his life because of no pre-nup. She was more attached to her biological family than her marriage, and it's very likely that some of the alimony will go to her family so they can sit on their butt and not work.
I'm neither for or against prenups. Where I'm from they have no legality.
I think people are against prenuptial agreements it shows a lack of trust and commitment. Also they seem very defeatest and it's very unromantic planning a divorce before you're even married.
Not in the slightest. You are young, you do not understand how marriage works. You think that marriage is for always, yet you live in a world were divorce is very commonplace. What happens if a couple divorce? A division of resources and responsibilitiies. This includes, money, properties, and children. Divorce is humiliating, it i expensive, it is draining, it causes mistrust and psychological damage. A prenup lasts for a couple of hours, when a divorce can last for years, especially court cases fighting over kids and money. With a prenup, you can have the peace of mind of that you will know what will happen if things go south. You wouldn't feel trapped in a doomed marriage, especially if it becomes an abusive one. You never know a person until you are married to them. That is very true because I speak from experience.
I am totally fine with it.. marriage itself is a contract.. and people change when there are no lovey dovey feelings anymore.. plus I'd not want anything of a guy if he and I are no longer together.. so I'd sign it without hesitation..
Most of the ones against them sound like gold diggers to me normally lol
Well, aren't marriages and relationships built on trust? If you trust him, then why do you need a prenup?
If I felt like I needed a prenup then I wouldn't be with him :P
Have you been married before? Have any of you been married? No,? Then why answer about something you really have no experience about? You would understand if you went through a divorce that was expensive and drawn out. I saw my uncles go through messy divorces. The messy part would have been avoided if there was a prenup. Trust me, its better when there is love and trust rather having to fight tooth and nail about it making you and him bitter enemies. There would be no surprises, no lawyers, no bitterness other than the scorn or lost love. Plus, it keeps you both in line because you both know what would happen because you both would be legally bound. Prenups are not one-sided unless you both let it be. In fact, you should be happy about it, because you will have a plan if it didn't work out. It actually makes divorce a lot more manageable.
If I trust my car and my driving skills to drive on the road, why get an insurance?
If your relationship is built on trust, then why do you need to get married?
@Mesonfielde I got married because I felt it was the right thing to do at the time. I didn't feel like I "needed" to.
It's all social programming, I guess. I wonder if I'll be able to overcome it when I get there and make an educated decision.
@Mesonfielde keep doing what's good for you and screw what everyone else thinks.👍
What if one partner runs a business, it fails and they end up with a major dept. Wouldn't it be convenient if the partners possessions were save?
Same for if one has a gambling problem, or anything else that makes them lose everything. It's a much bigger risk to share everything instead of always keeping one half save.
@Felinegirl then someone who wants a prenup can answer your question 😊 I wouldn't marry anyone who wanted a prenup from me and vise versa. I'm not a complicated woman and I expect the same in my man.
Women who are against prenups are the ones that want the man's money after the divorce. Everyone should get a prenup.
If a woman says that you don't really love her, just because you want a prenup or if she refuses it... leave her.
A true woman would be a realist, would understand that marriage may not always work out and that it is good to have your assets under control in case of a divorce.
I think it's pretty obvious why there's more women against it xD If we divorce, she's probably taking most of my shit, so why would anyone be against taking all the benefits?
Sorry... when me and my ex filed for divorce, I left him and everything else behind. I'd rather start new.
@stardust101 Unfortunately, not every woman is like you.
Im all for pre nups but as long as there's protection in there for me if I give my future husband babies sacrificing my career, finances, body and looks for nothing if it doesn't work out snd im left penniless. This is why a girls got ti have standards for marriage because its a huge risk.
@Spermdumster666 why the heck would you sacrifice your career? THAT is your future investment.
@stardust101 its a woman's choice have a career or raise kids. Women who try to do both usually dont do either well.
@Spermdumster666 with that username I wasn't expecting any intelligent answer.
I am 100% pro-prenuptial agreements. Even if it's just to dictate the allocation of funds within the marriage. I have some assets that I want to keep separate now and forever.
In favor of prenups just proves that you are materialistic, while not having prenups when getting married proves you aren't materialistic and you don't care about the other person's stuff or yours. You just care about the love between each other.
If I worked hard on my own business, and grew it to something big. I met a girl and wanted to marry her. I would want a prenup. I would share with her my success don't get me wrong. She is in no way entitled to half of all my hard work if we split up.
I know. It defies logic.
These girls that get offended when asked for a prenup, are the same the hold the marriage contract as the ultimate declaration love and trust. Go figure...
I'm confused, does a prenup prevent the un fit parent from paying childcare? There is this one girl in the comments who thinks if her husband is abusive and she grabs her 3 kids to leave, she doesn't want a prenup to protect her kids.
No it doesn't. But having half of his money plus childcare is better than just having him paying childcare, especially if she doesn't work herself.
@Felinegirl oh okay, also do women pay childcare?
Well my mom pays more than my dad, because she makes more.
most women are gold diggers in one form or another?
i should say ALL women... but i won't be able to handle the flak from that lol... i need deniability
Lol... only if that means we won't stay in relationships that contribute absolutely nothing to our lives in any way.
There are certainly some of us who stay -- happily -- in relationships and marriages where we give way more than we get, in terms of dollars and cents (myself included). But, yeah, we are definitely getting other things.
@redeyemindtricks i get your point... gotta get something out of it. my girl gets dick... lol... she's fine with that lol
Im not a golddigger at all. I study medicine so Ill probably end up with a man who makes less than me.
I do want someone who goes to university, but that's because I want to be able to hold up an interesting conversation.
@Felinegirl im a grad... talk to me...
and no, im not hitting on you. you want a convo... come get it.
I'm a college dropout. Come talk over mah head, fuckers. <3
@redeyemindtricks you'd be surprised what i know Redeye... they say "with age comes wisdom" i in no way doubt yours... but im sneaky. i know things you don't know.. and things you DONT wana know.
college dropout... please... my girl only has an assoc... I have a bachys and she still makes more than i do... its all about the brains.. not the paper... and I've got bigger brains than most... most
If you're the smartest person in the room, you're in the wrong room. Didn't anyone ever tell you that?
@redeyemindtricks i like to mess with people who think they are "smart"... people forget... there are different kinds of smart...
just because you have 4 different pieces of paper saying something doesn't make you "smart"... it just shows dedication... and possibly debt.
Me on the other hand, im well rounded.
"just because you have 4 different pieces of paper saying something..."
^^ hahaahha
dude i am... so not on yr wavelength. when I read this, I thought, "oh, it means I'm making a bunch of copies of important documents, so I won't get burned on taxes if the originals get lost."
yep, that's how I read that. like, the first 3 times
@redeyemindtricks you will be alright... point is... i don't give a crap how many degrees a person has... smarts are not written... they are shown...
yeah, well, i got that after the first 3 readings. lol
pro tip: never go around telling people you have a "bigger brain" than anyone else. nothing good can really come of that.
ironically, you seem to recognize the worthlessness of paper credentials -- but, you seem not to recognize that people who walk around declaring "I'm X" are, pretty much without exception, not X. Whatever X is.
Like, really, dude. "I've got bigger brains than most" pretty much guarantees that you don't.
@redeyemindtricks i might have to rephrase that then, but you have a point... a very good one. I always tell some guys when they are in an argument and they go "im a grown ass man", i always tell them that if you have to say it, you probably aren't. people see it if you really are one... excellent point...
also contradicted myself because i said "smarts are shown not written"... ugh... what you get for posting on GaG while hammered.
@Tdieseler <3
Off topic, but you really use a lot of dots. It's distracting.
@Felinegirl I hear you on the dots, BUT, look on the bright side -- they improve readability.
I am still trying to figure out who's the asshole behind the gradual change from 2 spaces after a period (= the universal standard when I was in school) to this 1-space bullshit that's endemic now.
I mean, I actually have to slow down to differentiate periods from commas now. WHY GOD WHYYYY
In that sense, I like the dots, because they put a bigger visual separation between sentences / thought units.
I do agree that the dots make a man's writing seem... well, less like a man's writing.
It's not as bad as when boys say declarative sentences that sound like questions -- with that god-awful upward cadence at the end -- but, yeah.
The dots do seem to convey "Wait, this is not my final answer, I need a lifeline!", or something along those lines, anyway.
@redeyemindtricks they do not improve readability. I was talking to Tdieseler and all the... are distracting.
@Felinegirl alright.
"1 space after a period" bothers me so much that I actually learned how to go into the firefox developer tools and change it to 2 (sometimes, if the page is plaintext enough). blah.
@redeyemindtricks are you trying to burn me? cuz i can switch over to "MAN's" writing if you want.
@Felinegirl I like dots... dont hate. its a spacer.
I'm totally getting a prenup if I ever get married (unlikely). Any woman who dodges signing one strikes me as a bit of a potential gold digger. I have some property of my own that I wanna preserve in case things go south, anyway.
Unfortunately the laws on wealth sharing don't seem to take a sensible approach. Today a man or woman who has wealth must be careful that their other half is not just after their money. Unfortunately not everyone behaves honorably.
They feel that love must be purely emotion based and that you protecting your assets is a sign that you don't fully trust them.
I however see emotions as a distraction so I would absolutely get a prenup.
Honestly I think this is just a quick signature and done. Regardless of who stands to lose more.
I will admit that asking for it is a highly pragmatist move and may come off as expecting things to fail.
A prenup is like insurance on a possible fallout if one party can't honour the agreements set up before a legal union.
Works out better for rich people
So if plan A fails, they can make plan B as good for them as they can. People can deny it but it's almost always the lesser earner who gets upset.
because if it doesn't work they know they will not get anything. so they dont like it
What women are you meeting most women I meet are for prenups
No. Pre ups are wrong simply because why marry someone you don't trust?
Why get vaccinated/a health insurance when you feel healthy? Why get a car insurance if you feel like your driving skills are good? Why get smoke detectors when your cooking skills are good? Why get a house alarm if you live in a safe neighborhood? Or why have locks on your doors at all?
Simple. You don't know what will happen in the future. A prenup isn't setting the marriage up for failure. A prenup is a plan B. Nobody gets a car insurance hoping that they'll end up in a car crash one day.
Because getting married is avoidable and a choice. Health problems aren't a choice. Car accidents aren't choices. You're house going up in flames isn't a choice. Having your house broken into isn't a choice. However. If you think someone will fuck you over in the future you have the choice to not fucking marry them.
But we're living in a place and time where the point of even dating someone is marriage so they'll write up a prenup to get to the finish line.
Buying/owning/using cars and houses ARE choices. You are comparing the wrong things. Marriage may be a choice but all the multiple possible reasons why a marriage would fail are not. This is why safeguards for just about everything exist. No one goes into a marriage assuming it will end in divorce and yet many of them do.
"If you think someone will fuck you over in the future you have the choice to not fucking marry them."
Or you could have both parties sign a pre nup and have the piece of mind that while one hopes the marriage lasts for the rest of their lives, you won't have to worry about someone stealing half of your stuff if things do go south.
Think about this rationally. While you can try to argue that asking for a pre nup is a lack of trust, anyone can make the case that not signing one means one is in favor of stealing what isn't yours. Only one of these two options actually leads to a fair outcome. The one where people sign prenuptial agreements.
@HorrorFan and after all that I still fell they are wrong. I would never sign one. And id never ask anyone to sign one. because if you think that person will take you for all you have then you shouldn't marry them. Bye bye now :)
I'm definitely not againts it. Knowing how much i have now makes me feel more secure if we have one.
I'm against them but I also never plan on getting married. Marriage is absolutely meaningless and prenups is one of the reasons why.
Prenups isn't a result of marriage, it is a result of abuse of divorce settlements. Nobody should be thinking about getting a divorce when they are getting married, at least they shouldn't be. It does happen however, and usually at the groom's expense. Men do not want to get married, not because of prenup, because weddings and the average girl's and society's expectations of how much you should spend on weddings, to the steep price of divorce. Since the 1900s, we have become more selfish than ever, and since then, men have been wanting to get married less and less. If I weren't married, I now probably would never get married. I am lucky to have my wife now, because I do not believe that there are a lot of good choices out there.
it's just a safety net. you really have no idea how a marriage will turn out. this comes from my own dad who is still married with almost 45 years. He told me marriage is pretty much a roll of the dice, it could have gone wrong due to unforeseen circumstances or maybe the spark is gone or something.
@Toad-1 exactly but if you truly love someone I don't believe you should plan for failure. Even if things don't workout you should trust that they wouldn't try to screw you over.
@Toad-1 then you obviously didn't know her well enough before you got married.
I think it has to do with tact. One way to see it is mistrust, the other way to see it is insurance. Going into marriage without a prenup is like becoming a miner or a similar, dangerous career without insurance. Yeah, you have to pay, it may be a lot because it is dangerous job, but will have a the assurance that you and your family will be protected if worse becomes the worst. You will have the peace of mind of knowing what would happen, instead of fearing of an unknown future. The thing that I don't understand is that most women are against prenups when in fact this is the best option for them as well as for men. It is because both get to pick what they want and what they are willing to give, when they love and trust each other. I don't think if your man loves and trust you, would be unwilling to give you a helping hand, because you are his world. If you get divorced and it would not matter if he cared or hated your guts. He would be legally bound to give what he agreed to you.
I'm support them too its a good idea to have it all down in writing and if the guy/girl is not supportive of it then I don't believe they are serious about each other
I don't agree with your poll options and haven't really found evidence that anyone is particularly against them. They are a hassle to create though.
Because they want to take your stuff, and think they deserve compensation for hurt feelings at your expense.
That is the only truth, anything else is just window dressing. Cease contact immediately with any girl who disagrees.
Because they are dumb. Also because they are gold diggers
Because women get married so they can take men for everything they have when they get divorced. That's why they're against it.
I marry mostly for religious purpose, but not without love of course. prenups dont exist in religion. And the guy I will be marrying knows that and believes the same.
If you aren't marrying a man just for his money, then you should have no problem signing a prenup.
Probably because it doesn't benefit them in anyway most of the time. Girls almost always marry someone with greater financial wealth so a prenup would generally only hurt her.
a guarantee or warranty on a marraige... kind of betting on failure... wrong.
loool, prenups are love, prenups are life.
Did this even make sense?
@RandomPerson1324 Shrek it does.
@Electronica he hates me, he will try to make me feel bad everytime XD
Lol. I'm sorry.
I think I would be nicer in person.
I don't know why I'm so stupid sometimes.
Because they are at some level prostitutes.
I'm don't have enough to make a prenup worth it.
Some want to have all the money when they divorce.
Those against prenups are hold diggers or naive
Cause they're gold diggers lol.
You can also add your opinion below!
Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News 
Most Helpful Opinions