Marriage? With a sub-section for women marrying down

Simple living, extreme early retirement, becoming and being wealthy, wisdom, praxis, personal growth,...
Chad
Posts: 3844
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2010 3:10 pm

Re: Marriage? With a sub-section for women marrying down

Post by Chad »

Ego wrote: A pre-nup is a contract. When entering into a contract both sides get something and both sides give something. Except that's not true for a pre-nup. The less-moneyed fiancee is giving up marital rights without getting anything in return. Certainly this imbalance will echo through the relationship.

Money is the primary cause of divorce. Teamwork is the antidote. Starting out with this imbalance with regard to money is asking for trouble.
This is obviously where our difference is. I view the pre-nup as eliminating an imbalance, not creating it. Why should the less moneyed person have any rights to what I made before we were together? I agree the imbalance would echo through the relationship, but the imbalance is without the pre-nup.

Teamwork is definitely the antidote, but there was no teamwork in what I earned or she earned, before we got married.

User avatar
Ego
Posts: 6689
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2011 12:42 am

Re: Marriage? With a sub-section for women marrying down

Post by Ego »

Chad wrote: This is obviously where our difference is. I view the pre-nup as eliminating an imbalance, not creating it. Why should the less moneyed person have any rights to what I made before we were together? I agree the imbalance would echo through the relationship, but the imbalance is without the pre-nup.

Teamwork is definitely the antidote, but there was no teamwork in what I earned or she earned, before we got married.
Yeah, I think part of the reason I've had trouble understanding your perspective is the fact that we earned our money after we got together. We worked together to earn it. I can see how it would feel imbalanced. That said, I think in every relationship there is a pairing or meshing of strengths and weaknesses. That is part of the beauty of it.

Spartan_Warrior
Posts: 1659
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 1:24 am

Re: Marriage? With a sub-section for women marrying down

Post by Spartan_Warrior »

firefighterjeff wrote:Don't be such a martyr.
Can't even disengage without ad hominem attacks. :lol:

As I said earlier--but now without the PC filter--any gold-digging misandrist shrew who would be upset by my desire to maintain my rightfully earned assets, or by my arguments concerning risks to said assets based on what you admit to be sound "factual evidence and logic", is a person I am all too happy to offend. To me this is like wearing lower quality clothing--it serves as a filter to weed out bad apples.

Certain posters have expressed (and you insinuated this as well; see my earlier comment on how predictable it is for women to react to these conversations by "shaming" men and calling them undesireable) that the men in this thread are the reason they won't marry. Well, pretty obviously, women with these types of attitudes are the reason why men are afraid to get married!

I am frankly all too happy that such people are able to order frozen internet sperm without dragging a man into their hot mess.

One thing's for sure, the honeymoon phase where I thought this forum was so elevated above the level of discourse of, say, Yahoo News comments, is rapidly ending. I think I might want a divorce. Which of you is going to pay me alimony to get me out of your house? (Which I'm taking too, by the way.)

lilacorchid
Posts: 476
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2011 3:20 pm
Location: Canada

Re: Marriage? With a sub-section for women marrying down

Post by lilacorchid »

@Spartan - My comment about declining a date was not meant to shame. To put it in a cliche: Don't judge a book by it's cover.

You are right for yourself in saying that if someone doesn't feel that each party (future wife may have loads more then you if you are looking for someone on the FI train) should protect their assets before jumping into a marriage, they aren't the person for you. It's obviously very important to you, and something you don't want to compromise. So make sure you don't! Or you may turn out to be one of those angry divorced forum posters mentioned above. ;)

And as someone once told me when I was a young woman still trying to find a partner: Everyone is crazy. You just have to find someone with the type of crazy you can live with.

Finally, are you threatning a goodbye cruel world post? Because that would just be the icing on the cake of this thread! :lol:

Spartan_Warrior
Posts: 1659
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 1:24 am

Re: Marriage? With a sub-section for women marrying down

Post by Spartan_Warrior »

@Lilac: No, not goodbye cruel world. More like lowering my expectations and intellectual involvment. I happen to like Yahoo News comments--not for rational discourse or logical debate, but for the lulz to be had at the lack of either. I'm starting to feel that way about here too (and not only from this thread; this, as you say, was icing on the cake).

Thank you, though, for being one of the comparitively civil and reasonable ones while this discussion lasted. :)

altoid
Posts: 186
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2012 5:26 pm

Re: Marriage? With a sub-section for women marrying down

Post by altoid »

@Spartan_Warrior, can you elaborate on the rational of "To me this is like wearing lower quality clothing--it serves as a filter to weed out bad apples. "? in a literal context ? How does wearing lower quality clothing help weed out bad applies?

Spartan_Warrior
Posts: 1659
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 1:24 am

Re: Marriage? With a sub-section for women marrying down

Post by Spartan_Warrior »

@Altoid: Sure! I dress in a cheap, hobo-like manner whenever possible not only to save money, but as a type of auto-filter so that (shallow, dumb) people who value things like expensive clothes will naturally tend to avoid me--and likewise I avoid them. <LINK>: viewtopic.php?p=55259#p55259

Similarly, by all accounts, my comments in this thread apparently serve as a great auto-filter for preventing interactions or relationships with shallow gold-diggers who believe they are entitled to any portion of my wealth by virtue of divorcing me.

lilacorchid
Posts: 476
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2011 3:20 pm
Location: Canada

Re: Marriage? With a sub-section for women marrying down

Post by lilacorchid »

Spartan_Warrior wrote:@Lilac: No, not goodbye cruel world. More like lowering my expectations and intellectual involvment. I happen to like Yahoo News comments--not for rational discourse or logical debate, but for the lulz to be had at the lack of either. I'm starting to feel that way about here too (and not only from this thread; this, as you say, was icing on the cake).

Thank you, though, for being one of the comparitively civil and reasonable ones while this discussion lasted. :)
Well, this is a pretty heated topic so I would expect there would be a few popcorn moments. Not as many as out there in inter-land, but a few. Personally, I think it's due to English not having another word for you like the French do. "Vous" meaning plural you vs everyone taking "you" as "tu" or specifically you. :)

I still think this is one of the better forums out there. I like the diversity here. And FTR, I agreed with a lot of what the other people said here too, I just said it differently. @riparian and @CS and @jennypenny made some very good points.

lilacorchid
Posts: 476
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2011 3:20 pm
Location: Canada

Re: Marriage? With a sub-section for women marrying down

Post by lilacorchid »

Spartan_Warrior wrote:Similarly, by all accounts, my comments in this thread apparently serve as a great auto-filter for preventing interactions or relationships with shallow gold-diggers who believe they are entitled to any portion of my wealth by virtue of divorcing me.
I will say they will serve as a red flag for some people, and not just gold diggers who can tell you won't give up the money. For example, I dated a divorced guy and I got burned because he obviously had not gotten over what his ex did. The next time a guy wanted a relationship with me but couldn't call his ex-wife anything other than "that bitch", I ran for the hills as I had seen that move before. I'm not saying you have to give up everything you worked for, but a marriage is a partnership and for most people, things tend to get intertwined. And that's part of the good stuff if you pick the right person. You come off as bitter and jaded in some parts of thread, even if you aren't IRL. I think that's what a lot of people are picking up on, and some of the more experienced members of the community are trying to give you some good advice. (As am I, it would seem... :P )

BecaS
Posts: 109
Joined: Sat Jul 13, 2013 7:16 pm

Re: Marriage? With a sub-section for women marrying down

Post by BecaS »

I have read through (or skimmed, honestly) almost all of the comments on this 8 page (to date) thread. At the risk of sounding/seeming/BEING dense, I honestly don't see the problem.

If you don't want to get married, don't get married. <shrug> What's the issue?

If you don't like the odds (as you perceive them) associated with marriage (as you perceive it) don't take the risk. <shrug>

There are, in my estimation, more socially acceptable ways of pairing available to any individual or couple, based on his/their preferences, than there has ever been in the history of paired off civilization. Please take advantage of this cornucopia of options. Don't get married. <shrug>

If all you want out of any social contract is sex on demand, it seems to me that there are a variety of options available to fulfill those needs, as long as you place yourself geographically such that you don't run afoul of secular laws in secular countries, religious laws in theocracies, and as long as you don't run afoul of basic human rights tenants in all countries involving the exploitation of the weak or the defenseless. Get your freak on in a sane, safe, consensual adult manner and don't get married. <shrug>

If you want to have a long-term monogamous relationship into which to introduce children but you don't want to risk your nest egg, then what you are saying is that you want to have a marriage without bringing your A game to the field. ??? Really? Is that the environment in which you wish to live? To raise future adults?

My peers call this "fear of commitment." My grandmother called it "Not ready to settle down." My mother called it "Doesn't know how to share." Notice she didn't say, "Can't share." Certainly we can all share. Knowing *how* to share is a process of learning the give and take of sharing successfully, and that requires the maturity to discern potentially successful give and take relationships from those doomed to failure. It doesn't take too many trips around the sand box before one learns that attempting to share with the playground bully usually doesn't work out too well. Not exactly the same but equally doomed to failure are sharing pairings based on dissimilar interests, unequal maturity levels, and unequal involvement. Hopefully we take those lessons into adulthood and choose our lifelong partnerships wisely, if indeed a lifetime partnership is desired. If not, don't get married. <shrug>

There are many, many more potential calamities involved in maintaining a marriage, in raising a family, in negotiating life, than losing a pile of cash. Certainly losing a pile of cash is one form of tragedy that we ALL hope to avoid- even us old married folks. But if you are avoiding marriage solely because you wish to avoid any risk of losing money, MONEY of all things, then by all means, don't get married.

Ask the spouse who is losing his long time partner to terminal illness, ask the parent who is losing or has lost a child, ask the family whose home and all of their memories have been taken by a wildfire or a tornado or a flood, ask the person who is leaving his or her family to deploy in a war zone, ask the spouse and the kids left behind, ask the person who is being taken from their family too soon by a terminal illness how they feel about that precious nest egg. If the pile of cash looms larger in your mind than any of these potential heartaches, you aren't ready to get married. Peace. There's no shame in that- there's just fact. You may never be "ready" to get married. Peace on that as well, and no shame. The shame comes if you get married in spite of it, and because of it you wreck another person(s) emotional, psychological and/or financial life, and yours as well.

Be honest and forthright about your decision not to marry or otherwise enter into a legal social contract with potential partners. That is basic ethics and will hopefully protect you from creating your own bad karma. If you find yourself involved with a person who hopes to change your mind, do the mature/sane/humane thing and disengage as politely, as firmly, as kindly and as quickly as you can. I say this because it is possible for people to fall in love unilaterally and to project their desires onto the other person. Don't take advantage of this situation; Don't Be That Guy (or Girl.)

Will this honest self-pronouncement limit your dating pool? Absolutely. Grow up and get over it. You do not owe it to any man, any woman, any societal norm or expectation, to your mother, or to anybody else to get married, so don't get married. The people who are dating in hopes of finding a lifetime partner do not owe you their time, their energy, their investment of effort or emotion, nor their physical intimacy, if you cannot or will not fulfill their needs and desires in a reciprocal relationship.

If you are 30 years old and you are afraid that you will not be attracted to your age-peer wife at age 60, and that is your reason for avoiding marriage, for God's sake, DON'T GET MARRIED. We can mitigate a lot of risk factors but science, society and medicine have yet to provide us with an alternative to aging other than death. If you suspect that you may in some manner "leave" your spouse (i.e. abandon part or all of your vows) as your partner ages, a natural process that none of us can avoid, then please, spare any future potential partners that pain. Also please send us all a picture of yourself at age 60 so that we may judge your relative physical attractiveness. (Christ on a cracker I am so glad that my husband does not find me disposable because after 31 years, two kids and menopause I can no longer fit into men's size 28 straight legged Levis. He's happy that I still fit into the kayak, the canoe, my hiking boots, in our camper, on my bicycle seat, and that I can still manage our 80 pound exuberant Labrador Retriever.)

I find it mildly amusing and a bit perplexing that so many young people (men?) on this forum have no problem trusting that precious nest egg to some semi-anonymous or completely anonymous fund manager, broker, financial advisor/service, bank, etc. - a person/entity that doesn't know you from Adam and could not care less about you or your life, is certainly not going to have your baby nor hold your head over the toilet when you are sick to death with food poisoning or a stomach virus, and yet the thought of a SPOUSE sends you into a tail spin. Funny, that. :) From where I sit there seem to be more legal remedies available to protect your assets in the face of a failed marriage/pending divorce than there are to protect your assets from a bad investment. Just ask the people who invested with Bernie Madoff. If I'm not mistaken (correct me if I'm wrong) many of Bernie's investors have yet to see a dime from that poor choice.

Also, this thought keeps banging around in that empty cavern above my too wide hips and over-ample middle aged bosom: why are you so very sure that your nest egg, present or future, is an object of envy and desire? Perhaps you need context. If you are so sure that the women (and we do seem to be focused on women as the antagonists in this thread) in your potential dating/mating pool are gold-diggers out to get your money, perhaps you need a good hard critical look in the mirror and at your target dating pool. Unless I am on an internet forum thread with a bevy of 20/30 something Warren Buffets and Bill Gates, I'm willing to bet that there are an equal number of savvy young women out there with nest eggs equal to or larger than yours. Perhaps you are not on their radar, and they are not on yours, because they are out of your league. Perhaps they are keeping themselves out of your way to avoid the risk that you might pose to their hard-earned assets. Just a thought... A little self-improvement and a more enlightened attitude might open up opportunities of which you are not currently aware. A broader perspective may inform you that your groceries ain't all that- and then you could relax a little and simply enjoy your (young) life.

In the meantime- don't get married!

User avatar
Ego
Posts: 6689
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2011 12:42 am

Re: Marriage? With a sub-section for women marrying down

Post by Ego »

lilacorchid wrote:Personally, I think it's due to English not having another word for you like the French do. "Vous" meaning plural you vs everyone taking "you" as "tu" or specifically you. :)
I'm from Philly where we are far more cultured than the rest of the English-speaking world. We solved this problem with the word "youse". Maybe we should adopt the custom here to avoid confusion. :P

Spartan_Warrior
Posts: 1659
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 1:24 am

Re: Marriage? With a sub-section for women marrying down

Post by Spartan_Warrior »

@lilacorchid: I'm certainly bitter and jaded now, after a thread about marriage has become a thread about me. Not sure about earlier in the thread. This, like riparian's accusation of "touting my opinions as fact", is something you'd have to point out to me.

And frankly you lost credibility when you said CS made good points. Every one of her posts in this thread struck me as rude, bitter, sexist/misandrist garbage of the highest order.

Spartan_Warrior
Posts: 1659
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 1:24 am

Re: Marriage? With a sub-section for women marrying down

Post by Spartan_Warrior »

@BecaS: Still missing the point. Still making remarks like the good partners are "out of my league". Good thing I only skimmed your arguments, as you evidently did mine.

BecaS
Posts: 109
Joined: Sat Jul 13, 2013 7:16 pm

Re: Marriage? With a sub-section for women marrying down

Post by BecaS »

M'kay. Let me sum it up for you, dude: Don't get married. <shrug> :)

BecaS
Posts: 109
Joined: Sat Jul 13, 2013 7:16 pm

Re: Marriage? With a sub-section for women marrying down

Post by BecaS »

M'kay. Let me sum it up for you, dude: Don't get married. No harm, no foul. :)

lilacorchid
Posts: 476
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2011 3:20 pm
Location: Canada

Re: Marriage? With a sub-section for women marrying down

Post by lilacorchid »

BecaS - *standing ovation* I would marry you, if I were that kind of girl, ha!

Ego - LOL, I actually thought of using "youse"

Spartan - Seriously. Look through the forest of all the posts and find some trees. Even someone you consider an jerk may have something worth listening to now and again. (And I'm cool with losing points. I know who I am and I'm okay with someone not liking all of what I say or how I say it.) In any case, I'm sure you'll figure out what works best for you!

Triangle
Posts: 161
Joined: Sun Jul 14, 2013 2:37 am

Re: Marriage? With a sub-section for women marrying down

Post by Triangle »

@BecaS: What are you talking about? The whole point made by Spartan and myself is that we're not getting married in these circumstances.

Spartan_Warrior
Posts: 1659
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 1:24 am

Re: Marriage? With a sub-section for women marrying down

Post by Spartan_Warrior »

Triangle wrote:@BecaS: What are you talking about? The whole point made by Spartan and myself is that we're not getting married in these circumstances.
This.

I don't need advice on whether or not to get married, thanks. I don't need to be patronized. I don't need the history of gender relations between men and women since the beginning of time. I don't need to hear about perceived gender-based pay disparities. I don't need psychological woo claiming that acknowledging a risk makes it more likely to occur. I don't need to be shamed into believing I am poor relationship material for questioning a perceived imbalance. And I definitely don't need armchair psychoanalysis and judgments of my character in terms of everything from my maturity level to the quality of my relationships.

I participated in this thread to discuss perceived gender bias in divorce court, the consequences of divorce on men and/or high net worth individuals, and strategies for mitigating those consequences. Period.

Almost without exception, the latter issues were ignored and the former issues were emphasized, explicitly or implicitly. Like I said, I am not interested in that.

Frankly that says more about the subject of gender bias than anything I could say. I'll leave it at that.

Would a mod please just lock this thread already?

secretwealth
Posts: 1948
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2011 3:31 am

Re: Marriage? With a sub-section for women marrying down

Post by secretwealth »

I've stayed out of this discussion, but I can't help myself from asking: how did this comment relate to "gender bias in divorce court, the consequences of divorce on men and/or high net worth individuals, and strategies for mitigating those consequences"?
Spartan_Warrior wrote:I just don't view pregnancy as a valid excuse for a woman to let herself go (although it's often used as such). Obviously complications can occur.

Spartan_Warrior
Posts: 1659
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 1:24 am

Re: Marriage? With a sub-section for women marrying down

Post by Spartan_Warrior »

It didn't, obviously. It related to one of the many tangents this thread took.

Post Reply