NYT: Prenup is a four letter word

[sonrisa]

This woman doesn't believe in the future:
-she had a career that doesn't support the lifestyle she wants to have (hence the debt)
- she didn't plan for her own move
- she magically thought motherhood wasn't a bigger commitment than marriage
- she refuses to imagine the marriage she was reluctant to enter could end

The man doesn't believe in her and is only marrying her because they have a kid together.

Not a healthy combo.

[whatnext]

Oct 13, 2017 15:47:29 GMT -5 CheeringCharm said:

Oct 13, 2017 12:43:17 GMT -5 jlt19 said:

Well, that's what child support is for and is completely different than this. 

I think prenups are pretty important when there's a big difference in assets coming into a marriage. I wouldn't hesitate to sign one, but I also can't say that I'd have felt that way when I was young and engaged. Lucky for us, we were both broke, lol.

Yeah I guess I was thinking anout child support but also alimony since he sounds like he has a lot of money/makes a lot of money. I just don’t get men (because it usually is men) who are totally fine with seeing their exes struggle financially just because the romantic relationship is over and they’re not having sex anymore. Especially when they have the kind of money that makes it easy to support two households. I see and hear about this kind of thing a lot and it seems women are much more likely to get screwed over financially in a divorce than men. Its something like 20% of women fall into poverty after a divorce. The changing alimony laws don’t help.

And I'm sick of the women who complain about not getting enough child support when their kids eat ramen every night and the woman is wearing designer clothes and holidaying in Fiji every chance she gets. There's women who get a good level of financial support and  have good financial sense and make it work for them and there is those that don't (just like men - I've seen the opposite about those bitching about having to pay child support while they live a much better life than their kids)

Both of these people have problems, both of them should have realised a lot of this before they did - I say she's as bad as he is

[cookiemdough]

Oct 14, 2017 1:07:08 GMT -5 whatnext said:

And I'm sick of the women who complain about not getting enough child support when their kids eat ramen every night and the woman is wearing designer clothes and holidaying in Fiji every chance she gets. There's women who get a good level of financial support and  have good financial sense and make it work for them and there is those that don't (just like men - I've seen the opposite about those bitching about having to pay child support while they live a much better life than their kids)

[/p]

How often does this really happen though? It smacks of the stories of people using their EBT card to buy lobster. I think perpetrating the narrative that women are living high off the hog from child support ultimately does a disservice because men even ones who don't have to pay very much (like my ex) treat child support as some kind of albatross around his neck even though it has been proven time and time again with hard numbers that I spend far more on our children than he does.

[sporklemotion]

I'm not a lawyer or even lawyer adjacent, but I was kind of put off by the way she talked about her lawyer-- it sounds like he was looking out for her interests more than she was.
I am not against prenup, but this does seem like a case where the battle pointed out underlying issues in the relationship.

[CheeringCharm]

Oct 14, 2017 0:40:16 GMT -5 pantsparty said:

Oct 13, 2017 15:47:29 GMT -5 CheeringCharm said:

Yeah I guess I was thinking anout child support but also alimony since he sounds like he has a lot of money/makes a lot of money. I just don’t get men (because it usually is men) who are totally fine with seeing their exes struggle financially just because the romantic relationship is over and they’re not having sex anymore. Especially when they have the kind of money that makes it easy to support two households. I see and hear about this kind of thing a lot and it seems women are much more likely to get screwed over financially in a divorce than men. Its something like 20% of women fall into poverty after a divorce. The changing alimony laws don’t help.

Um, you don't get that? LOL. I've yet to meet a divorced man (or woman) who wanted to pay alimony so their ex-spouse could live comfortably. I'm not disagreeing with you, I'm just saying it's a high bar to set that anyone wants to write that check.

It's also pretty simplistic to say they don't want to write the check "just because the romantic relationship is over and they're not having sex." They no longer live their lives together. It's not like they're hanging out on the weekends and living in separate residences.

I agree it's shitty. But it's also human nature to claim what's "yours" even if someone else being a part of your life is the reason you have it (which is the case with so many financially successful married men). 

I know it’s common, that’s why it troubles me (especially because it seems that the woman is almost always the one who is in the more vulnerable financial position). That’s also partly why I don’t understand people who seem to think having a child with someone is less of a commitment than marriage. When you have children together, you’ll always be connected through them, especially when they’re young. The two of you are their cornerstones. Because of those ties, you’re still part of the same larger family even though the romantic relationship has ended. I’m specifically talking about people who have enough money such that supporting two households is not a large burden. They really don’t care about their children seeing their mothers worry and stress about money? For the sake of their kids, I’d think they’d want to do what they can to help their exes be the best parents they can.

[sonrisa]

Oct 14, 2017 1:07:08 GMT -5 whatnext said:

And I'm sick of the women who complain about not getting enough child support when their kids eat ramen every night and the woman is wearing designer clothes and holidaying in Fiji every chance she gets. 

Let me guess: this woman also seduces unsuspecting, faithful married men then cries rape just to get the hush money, right?

[pantsparty]

Oct 14, 2017 9:58:30 GMT -5 CheeringCharm said:

Oct 14, 2017 0:40:16 GMT -5 pantsparty said:

Um, you don't get that? LOL. I've yet to meet a divorced man (or woman) who wanted to pay alimony so their ex-spouse could live comfortably. I'm not disagreeing with you, I'm just saying it's a high bar to set that anyone wants to write that check.

It's also pretty simplistic to say they don't want to write the check "just because the romantic relationship is over and they're not having sex." They no longer live their lives together. It's not like they're hanging out on the weekends and living in separate residences.

I agree it's shitty. But it's also human nature to claim what's "yours" even if someone else being a part of your life is the reason you have it (which is the case with so many financially successful married men). 

I know it’s common, that’s why it troubles me (especially because it seems that the woman is almost always the one who is in the more vulnerable financial position). That’s also partly why I don’t understand people who seem to think having a child with someone is less of a commitment than marriage. When you have children together, you’ll always be connected through them, especially when they’re young. The two of you are their cornerstones. Because of those ties, you’re still part of the same larger family even though the romantic relationship has ended. I’m specifically talking about people who have enough money such that supporting two households is not a large burden. They really don’t care about their children seeing their mothers worry and stress about money? For the sake of their kids, I’d think they’d want to do what they can to help their exes be the best parents they can.

This is some utopian society, where we all care equally for everyone's needs. This is not even about financially supporting someone being a "large burden." The high earner has no desire to financially support his or her ex-spouse, period. It's only the laws of child support and alimony that prevent low earners from getting totally screwed, not the goodwill of the high-earner. Also, most people DO NOT like their ex-spouses and DO NOT feel they should have to financially support him/her. Even if, as it is so frequently the case, a stay-at-home spouse was critical to the fact that the high-earner could focus on their career.

It would be great if people felt and acted like this, but people in general suck. LOL.

[pantsparty]

Oct 14, 2017 11:03:19 GMT -5 sonrisa said:

Oct 14, 2017 1:07:08 GMT -5 whatnext said:

And I'm sick of the women who complain about not getting enough child support when their kids eat ramen every night and the woman is wearing designer clothes and holidaying in Fiji every chance she gets. 

Let me guess: this woman also seduces unsuspecting, faithful married men then cries rape just to get the hush money, right?

She also buys lobster and prime rib with her food stamps, all while texting on the newest iPhone!

[MrsAxilla]

This reminds me of the The New Midlife Crisis that was posted a few days ago.

Is it any wonder that women our age possess a bone-deep, almost hallucinatory panic about money? It's not an idle worry. By some estimates, we carry more debt than any other age group (about $37,000 more than the national consumer debt average). We're some of the best-educated women in history, and yet we're downwardly mobile; about two-thirds of us have less wealth than our parents did at the same age.

I don't know that the husband here is an asshole.  More like he's oblivious to the shame and panic and failure she felt for not having more assets at age 42.  Maybe I'm projecting because that article really stuck with me.  I made DH read it after I broke down in tears when I asked him to transfer money so I can pay my car.  He didn't understand - we share finances, so whether it's in my account or his is irrelevant.  No problem. To him it's a simple business transaction, but sometimes it's stupid emotional for me.  Maybe it's perimenopause.  I should probably google that...

[whattheheck]

Maybe she doesn't know where the prenup is, but you can sure that he does.

[goldengirlz]

Oct 14, 2017 11:48:20 GMT -5 MrsAxilla said:

This reminds me of the The New Midlife Crisis that was posted a few days ago.

Is it any wonder that women our age possess a bone-deep, almost hallucinatory panic about money? It's not an idle worry. By some estimates, we carry more debt than any other age group (about $37,000 more than the national consumer debt average). We're some of the best-educated women in history, and yet we're downwardly mobile; about two-thirds of us have less wealth than our parents did at the same age.

I don't know that the husband here is an asshole.  More like he's oblivious to the shame and panic and failure she felt for not having more assets at age 42. Maybe I'm projecting because that article really stuck with me.  I made DH read it after I broke down in tears when I asked him to transfer money so I can pay my car.  He didn't understand - we share finances, so whether it's in my account or his is irrelevant.  No problem. To him it's a simple business transaction, but sometimes it's stupid emotional for me.  Maybe it's perimenopause.  I should probably google that...

This was my takeaway too. I also wonder if our opinions of them would have been different if she were the one trying to protect assets and he had pursued the creative career.

DH and I have a combination of joint and separate accounts because I definitely like having “my” money. Of course, when I say that, many people would interpret that as a neutral, or even a feminist, statement — and historically it would be. When a man says that, he’s seen as an asshole.

[MrsAxilla]

Oct 14, 2017 21:11:38 GMT -5 goldengirlz said:

Oct 14, 2017 11:48:20 GMT -5 MrsAxilla said:

This reminds me of the The New Midlife Crisis that was posted a few days ago.
I don't know that the husband here is an asshole.  More like he's oblivious to the shame and panic and failure she felt for not having more assets at age 42. Maybe I'm projecting because that article really stuck with me.  I made DH read it after I broke down in tears when I asked him to transfer money so I can pay my car.  He didn't understand - we share finances, so whether it's in my account or his is irrelevant.  No problem. To him it's a simple business transaction, but sometimes it's stupid emotional for me.  Maybe it's perimenopause.  I should probably google that...

This was my takeaway too. I also wonder if our opinions of them would have been different if she were the one trying to protect assets and he had pursued the creative career.

DH and I have a combination of joint and separate accounts because I definitely like having “my” money. Of course, when I say that, many people would interpret that as a neutral, or even a feminist, statement — and historically it would be. When a man says that, he’s seen as an asshole.

DH's salary supports our family and we agreed the money I earn from my contract job is "mine," but really I view it more like family bonus money that *I* contribute, and I do get a sense of pride from that.  Like when dinner out isn't really in the budget and I can say "my treat!"  Or pay for the kids' activities or new shoes or birthday presents.  

[parker]

B.B.

[sonrisa]

The prenup was equivalent to the community property laws of California where  they live (which are some of the most protective of someone in her position). She gave up nothing. He got nothing.

The prenup was just "If you won't educate yourself about what you are committing to, then let's pay a lawyer to educate you." and Still she complains about it. I don't have much patience for someone so determined to be willfully ignorant.

[irishbride2]

We have a prenup, and if h had been against it, it would have been a huge red flag to me.

That being said, they don't seem well suited.

[noradog]

Oct 15, 2017 0:29:48 GMT -5 parker said:

B.B.

Off topic, but what does this mean?

[pinkdutchtulips]

Oct 13, 2017 15:47:29 GMT -5 CheeringCharm said:

Oct 13, 2017 12:43:17 GMT -5 jlt19 said:

Well, that's what child support is for and is completely different than this. 

I think prenups are pretty important when there's a big difference in assets coming into a marriage. I wouldn't hesitate to sign one, but I also can't say that I'd have felt that way when I was young and engaged. Lucky for us, we were both broke, lol.

Yeah I guess I was thinking anout child support but also alimony since he sounds like he has a lot of money/makes a lot of money. I just don’t get men (because it usually is men) who are totally fine with seeing their exes struggle financially just because the romantic relationship is over and they’re not having sex anymore. Especially when they have the kind of money that makes it easy to support two households. I see and hear about this kind of thing a lot and it seems women are much more likely to get screwed over financially in a divorce than men. Its something like 20% of women fall into poverty after a divorce. The changing alimony laws don’t help.

in most states alimony doesn't kick in unless you've been married 10+ years ....