This entire thread is just further proof to me that prenuptial agreements should be freely entered into by people who have any semblance of assets or could have assets in the future attributable to them. Prenups should be destigmatized.

Situations like your story and several others just should not happen, assuming the parties involved aren't abusing anyone or cooking drugs in the house… etc. this goes for both sexes btw. Protect your assets.

Idc how in love you think you are - read the stories in this very thread. Things are all rosy one day then BAM everything you own is gone and your soon to be ex spouse has ran off with the personal trainer/ hot young secretary.

This thread also makes me scared to death of marriage.

combat wombat said:

---

Ags4DaWin said:

---

GarlandAg2012 said:

---

AggieArchitect04 said:

---

Jesus Christ, SOME women are complete pieces of *****

For every sob story a woman wants to tell about how she was wronged by a man, there are like 10-15 for how some crazy **** completely ****ed over a guy.

---

You think women screw over men 10-15x more often than the reverse? Like, actually?

---

Women initiate 90% of divorces.

Women are awarded custody 80% of the time.

All a woman has to do in order to keep the father away is allege child abuse.

It has been genetically shown that somewhere between 15 and 20 % of all children have fathers other than who is on the birth certificate. And in alot of states once ur name is on the birth certificate, you cannot rescind your parental responsibilities if you find out later the kid is not yours because it would "be damaging to the child".

80% of all alimony payments go to women.

Now I don't know about 10x but there have been many female family law attorneys that have given lectures about how they were staunch feminists before getting g into family law and after being in family law and seeing how the divorce and custody system is rigged against men, they are now staunch male advocates.

Maybe back in the 70's women got screwed in divorce. I wasn't around back then.

I can tell you that statistically and listening to many people in family law, the system is now 100% rigged against men.

Men should not get married unless they are 100% sure their woman is as dedicated to the marriage as they are.

---

I'm female. I watched my husband's two best friends get divorced by terrible women. They took the children. Both has another guy lined up before the filed for divorce.

Both men lost custody of their kids. They were good fathers who loved their kids.

I have known women to file for divorce for the dumbest reasons. They weren't "happy". These were "Christian" women who had husbands who weren't cheating, were not abusive, etc. They were boring. One woman uttered the phrase that "God wouldn't want me to be unhappy." She had children. She was willing to take them away from their father.

Life is what you make of it. Marriage is USUALLY what you put into it. I have seen surveys that five years after a divorce most people would not have gotten the divorce if they had it to do over again.

Women need to put down the romance novels and men need to turn off the porn. Both lead to unrealistic expectations.

---

Agree 100%. It takes a little effort, which is lost in the process of living life and/or raising a family.

Not to mention selfish concepts of happiness, and how we are expected or encouraged to seek it these days. Happiness used to be achieved through hard work and living a virtuous and honorable life. Sometime in the 17th and 18th century it became about pursuing a feeling, and we get put on the downward societal trajectory that we have been on.

married 33 years now. The Rib and I joke that we have to stay married b/c no one else would have us.

Aggie Infantry said:

---

married 33 years now. The Rib and I joke that we have to stay married b/c no one else would have us.

---

Does she cringe when you call her "the rib" though? Because I did.

Ags4DaWin said:

---

GarlandAg2012 said:

---

AggieArchitect04 said:

---

Jesus Christ, SOME women are complete pieces of *****

For every sob story a woman wants to tell about how she was wronged by a man, there are like 10-15 for how some crazy **** completely ****ed over a guy.

---

You think women screw over men 10-15x more often than the reverse? Like, actually?

---

It has been genetically shown that somewhere between 15 and 20 % of all children have fathers other than who is on the birth certificate. And in alot of states once ur name is on the birth certificate, you cannot rescind your parental responsibilities if you find out later the kid is not yours because it would "be damaging to the child".

---

I hadn't heard that stat before. It seems crazy, not saying wrong. Does anyone have a like to a story on this?

combat wombat said:

---

Life is what you make of it. Marriage is USUALLY what you put into it. I have seen surveys that five years after a divorce most people would not have gotten the divorce if they had it to do over again.

---

I would have, but as the initiator and the guy I'm already a bit of an outlier.

Alimony is a life sentence more often than not in this state and I consider myself lucky to have escaped it. I don't see how that wouldn't affect suicide rates, there has to be a study about it somewhere.

This would have been the 40th for me and Teacher Wife '82


Always remember, it could be worse. After 22 years of marriage, my step mom had her kids come over and move her out of the ranch house, leaving my 92 year old dad high and dry. He screwed up on the pre-nup and it cost him a quarter million.

BenFiasco14 said:

---

This entire thread is just further proof to me that prenuptial agreements should be freely entered into by people who have any semblance of assets or could have assets in the future attributable to them. Prenups should be destigmatized.

Situations like your story and several others just should not happen, assuming the parties involved aren't abusing anyone or cooking drugs in the house… etc. this goes for both sexes btw. Protect your assets.

Idc how in love you think you are - read the stories in this very thread. Things are all rosy one day then BAM everything you own is gone and your soon to be ex spouse has ran off with the personal trainer/ hot young secretary.

This thread also makes me scared to death of marriage.

---

Eddie Murphy warned us 30 years ago about it.

If your partner balks at the mention of a pre-nup, then it's a pretty good sign they are not rational.

if you aint no chump, holla WE WANT PRENUPS.

B-1 83 said:

---

This would have been the 40th for me and Teacher Wife '82


Always remember, it could be worse. After 22 years of marriage, my step mom had her kids come over and move her out of the ranch house, leaving my 92 year old dad high and dry. He screwed up on the pre-nup and it cost him a quarter million.

---

It sounds bad. But was your dad completely independent? If not. was she capable of caring for your dad? Did she need to go into some sort of assisted living?

Also, I have no idea how much your dad had, 250K doesn't seem like she screwed him after 22 years together.

I'll grant that she may have been a succubus without conscience… but were there mitigating circumstances you don't want to see because she was your stepmom and not your mom?

Robert C. Christian said:

---

Ags4DaWin said:

---

GarlandAg2012 said:

---

AggieArchitect04 said:

---

Jesus Christ, SOME women are complete pieces of *****

For every sob story a woman wants to tell about how she was wronged by a man, there are like 10-15 for how some crazy **** completely ****ed over a guy.

---

You think women screw over men 10-15x more often than the reverse? Like, actually?

---

It has been genetically shown that somewhere between 15 and 20 % of all children have fathers other than who is on the birth certificate. And in alot of states once ur name is on the birth certificate, you cannot rescind your parental responsibilities if you find out later the kid is not yours because it would "be damaging to the child".

---

I hadn't heard that stat before. It seems crazy, not saying wrong. Does anyone have a like to a story on this?

---

It's extrapolated from two things.
1) 1/3 of all paternity tests show negative results.

Which on the surface would make u think 1 in 3 kids. However u have to take into account that people getting a paternity test are probably more likely to not be the father. Ie there is suspected infidelity or the woman is promiscuous. So this number is probably inflated in comparison to the general population.

In some survey studies it shows as low as 5%. But because of the nature of the study this is likely underreported because women are reluctant to admit the father is not the father just as how women generally underreport their number of sexual partners.

Genetic studies like from 23 and me also indicate that the number is probably between 8 and 12% with 10 being the happy medium.

Ags4DaWin said:

---

Robert C. Christian said:

---

Ags4DaWin said:

---

GarlandAg2012 said:

---

AggieArchitect04 said:

---

Jesus Christ, SOME women are complete pieces of *****

For every sob story a woman wants to tell about how she was wronged by a man, there are like 10-15 for how some crazy **** completely ****ed over a guy.

---

You think women screw over men 10-15x more often than the reverse? Like, actually?

---

It has been genetically shown that somewhere between 15 and 20 % of all children have fathers other than who is on the birth certificate. And in alot of states once ur name is on the birth certificate, you cannot rescind your parental responsibilities if you find out later the kid is not yours because it would "be damaging to the child".

---

I hadn't heard that stat before. It seems crazy, not saying wrong. Does anyone have a like to a story on this?

---

It's extrapolated from two things.
1) 1/3 of all paternity tests show negative results.

Which on the surface would make u think 1 in 3 kidd. However u have to take into account that people getting a paternity test are probably more likely to not be the father. So this number is probably very inflated.

In some survey studies it shows as low as 5%. But because of the nature of the study this is likely underreported because women are reluctant to admit the father is not the father just as how women underreported their number of sexual partners.

Genetic studies like from 23 and me also indicate that the number is probably between 8 and 12% with 10 being the happy medium.

---

This means that one-third of a kid is not mine.

Aggie Infantry said:

---

married 33 years now. The Rib and I joke that we have to stay married b/c no one else would have us.

---

You have to stay married because not a lot of women are okay with being referred to as "The Rib".

So if your last name is McCall, McAlister, McAndrew or something like that, is it acceptable to call her McRib?

Three different friends with wives who f'd them over:

Coworker busted his ass working 12 hour shifts 6 days a week to provide for his wife because she was diagnosed with a medical condition (undiagnosed at time of marriage) that prevented her from driving or holding any kind of real job. She thanked him by running around on him and sleeping with a friend while the husband worked. He grew suspicious and eventually caught her in the act. He moved out, but they reconciled and are still married, now with kids.

Another buddy married his high school sweetheart. Five or so years in, she went to some hippie "find yourself" retreat with one of her friends, which ultimately led to her deciding that she wasn't happy. Final straw was when she told him "I want to have kids, just not with you." He wanted to get help, she wanted out. They divorced and she married the local tire guy. My buddy married a two time Olympian 13 years his junior and they've built several successful businesses. He's planning to fully retire at 50. He definitely won that one.

Third friend's wife cheated on him for a long time, but he had no clue. He accidentally caught her and realized how long it had been going on. He filed for divorce. Judge said he has to move out of his house and she gets primary custody of the kids, in spite of him being the primary breadwinner and the parent who was always around to pick them up from school, go to school functions, etc. His wife basically birthed them and said "tag, you're it." Texas paternity laws seem to be so stacked against the fathers that it's damn near criminal.

GrayMatter said:

---

So if your last name is McCall, McAlister, McAndrew or something like that, is it acceptable to call her McRib?

---

Already made that joke

https://texags.com/forums/38/topics/3354775/replies/64150709#64150709

Ex-gf's dad got custody of her and her little sister when her mom and dad divorced.

There is a lot to unpack with this story, but basically her mom ran around on her dad with multiple guys that were teenagers. Ex-gf was a freshman going to high school with a couple of guys that were banging her mom, including a senior who would become her step-dad.

The judge wasn't kind to the mom in the divorce. Didn't hurt that it was a smallish town and the dad knew everybody and was liked by everybody.

Watching a really bad divorce now with a sister in law and the ramifications. Her husband is basically Dennis from Always Sunny but was a musician. He cheated multiple times and got caught. He already had another relationship with another woman even while getting caught.

As bad as that was, they both fight constantly and are trying to emotionally damage the other. It is horrible to watch and the kids are in the crossfire.

Makes me thankful as hell I grew up with parents and GPs that made it to 50 year anniversaries.

Marriage and starting a family is both the most rewarding and challenging things I've ever done in my life. It's worth the effort when you find someone willing to get in the foxhole with you and fight out life.

combat wombat said:

---

B-1 83 said:

---

This would have been the 40th for me and Teacher Wife '82


Always remember, it could be worse. After 22 years of marriage, my step mom had her kids come over and move her out of the ranch house, leaving my 92 year old dad high and dry. He screwed up on the pre-nup and it cost him a quarter million.

---

It sounds bad. But was your dad completely independent? If not. was she capable of caring for your dad? Did she need to go into some sort of assisted living?

Also, I have no idea how much your dad had, 250K doesn't seem like she screwed him after 22 years together.

I'll grant that she may have been a succubus without conscience… but were there mitigating circumstances you don't want to see because she was your stepmom and not your mom?

---

Stepmother married his dad when is dad was 70 if my math is correct.

There is no way in hell she deserved anything from that marriage.

The guy was already retired and had accumulated everything prior to the marriage.

When a woman marries a guy and gets half in the divorce when they each had no wealth prior that's one thing.

When a woman marries a retired guy she did nothing to help build that wealth and deserves nothing from the marriage that the man is not willing to give her as a gift.

The same goes for men who marry wealthy widows.

Property divisions in theory are supposed to reflect wealth accumulated after the marriage. How many 70 year old men are still hustling?

Not many.

You have no idea whether she brought anything into the marriage. They were married 22 years. That's less than $1,000/month. Did she cook most of his meals, clean his house, wash his clothes? Did she get a SS check every month that covered most of her expenses? Even if she never worked, if she was a widow she would have been entitled to survivor benefits. Did she work at all, even part-time?

Assuming she's not entitled to some assets in a divorce is dumb. Even I admitted she might be the spawn of Satan.

There probably more to this than he posted.

I am opposed to divorce from a moral view in almost all circumstances. However, when divorcing I don't think that a wife (or husband) deserves nothing. There are situations when they might.

I understand the point you are making. In general, I agree. But his grandfather may have had health issues that she was unable to handle. Furthermore, she may have had her own health issues or needed more care than he was able or willing to give her. If so, her family may have moved her out in order to have her cared for properly. And she may have been entitled $250K. We don't have enough information to actually make that judgment.

Or they might just have been greedy.

If I ever ended up divorced I'd be completely effed for several reasons. No way I could function as highly as I do without the support of my wife and inwould absolutely not be able to navigate today's trash dating scene.

Dating today would be a nightmare. Especially after a certain age. If something happens to my wife or our marriage I'm just going to play guitar a lot more.

I've seen a lot of high school classmates go through multiple marriages and bat around to the top of the order. They are now hitched or at least hooked up with in some fashion other former high school classmates. Some of them they didn't even really know years ago.

It's like When Harry Met Sally: "You're going to have to move back to New Jersey. You've already slept with everyone in New York."

Robert C. Christian said:

---

Ags4DaWin said:

---

GarlandAg2012 said:

---

AggieArchitect04 said:

---

Jesus Christ, SOME women are complete pieces of *****

For every sob story a woman wants to tell about how she was wronged by a man, there are like 10-15 for how some crazy **** completely ****ed over a guy.

---

You think women screw over men 10-15x more often than the reverse? Like, actually?

---

It has been genetically shown that somewhere between 15 and 20 % of all children have fathers other than who is on the birth certificate. And in alot of states once ur name is on the birth certificate, you cannot rescind your parental responsibilities if you find out later the kid is not yours because it would "be damaging to the child".

---

I hadn't heard that stat before. It seems crazy, not saying wrong. Does anyone have a like to a story on this?

---

This story from The Atlantic says 5 percent to 15 percent. I would bet that the proliferation of 23andMe and AncestryDNA has moved that number a bit higher. https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2007/07/who-s-your-daddy/305969/

If you don't mind joining a group, DNA Surprises support group has a bunch of stories about what happens when the DNA test goes wrong.

No, he was pretty independent and continued to live out there for another 3+ years by himself. She had her own place and pension, and none of that money should have been hers. It was all his investments.

Aggie Infantry said:

---

married 33 years now. The Rib and I joke that we have to stay married b/c no one else would have us.

---

my wife and I joke that if I would starve for a lack of good food (she is an awesome cook) and she would go insane b/c none of the electronics would work (cell, ipad, wi-fi, internet, etc.).

It's like Global Thermal Nuclear War...or mutually assured destruction.

B-1 83 said:

---

No, he was pretty independent and continued to live out there for another 3+ years by himself. She had her own place and pension, and none of that money should have been hers. It was all his investments.

---

WELL, THEN, THAT SUCKS.

Carlo4 said:

---

Watching a really bad divorce now with a sister in law and the ramifications. Her husband is basically Dennis from Always Sunny but was a musician. He cheated multiple times and got caught. He already had another relationship with another woman even while getting caught.

---

This doesn't sound at all like Dennis. Before she'd even have a chance to find out he would have

S - Separated Entirely

555-PINF said:

---

Texas paternity laws seem to be so stacked against the fathers that it's damn near criminal.

---

I'm not sure people realize just how horrible it is and how easily it can happen TO ANYONE - it really doesn't matter how good of a person/father you are. To the courts, you are a case number and that's it.

The challenge with getting any law changed is the social perception around single mothers versus single fathers. Being a parent is hard and being a single parent is hard without a doubt. But single mothers get sympathy way more than single fathers and no legislator is going to want to stand against public outcry from mothers if dads are given more rights. Which is baffling to me in an era where equality is so important. Apparently equality can't be applied universally. Bizarre.

It's a losing battle until more people (including women) are honest with themselves and see it for what it is - a one-sided system built to reward mothers and punish fathers.

And when men/fathers do stand up for themselves, this is the takeaway from all the naive, uninformed idiots...misogyny.

Quote:

---

The gangs all here! Now it's a classic TexAgs misogyny thread. Who could have guessed.

---

combat wombat said:

---

B-1 83 said:

---

No, he was pretty independent and continued to live out there for another 3+ years by himself. She had her own place and pension, and none of that money should have been hers. It was all his investments.

---

WELL, THEN, THAT SUCKS.

---

combat wombat said:

---

You have no idea whether she brought anything into the marriage. Ho back and read my post. Nowhere did I assume that she brought no assets into the marriage. That was 100% projection by you. You automatically assume that I am a misogynist and ran with it. They were married 22 years. That's less than $1,000/month. Did she cook most of his meals, clean his house, wash his clothes? Did she get a SS check every month that covered most of her expenses? Even if she never worked, if she was a widow she would have been entitled to survivor benefits. Did she work at all, even part-time? Umm....what does any of that matter? You have two people living together, retired. They are bringing all the assets they accumulated prior to retirement into the marriage. They split living expenses however long they split them. You are ASSUMING she did housework. How sexist of you. Regardless of that fact, if you are retired it is highly unlikely that you are working to accumulate more wealth. Most states and most prenups explicitly state that community property is wealth and assets accumulated after the marriage. And IDGAF how much cooking and cleaning she did, she doesn't deserve the wealth a person accumulated over the course of their life (at the expense of their progeny) just because she came along after retirement. She did nothing. NOTHING. To help support him in the accumulation of those assets. Enticing a person to marry you doesn't entitled you to the wealth they accumulated prior to meeting you. What did she do to earn that?

Assuming she's not entitled to some assets in a divorce is dumb. Even I admitted she might be the spawn of Satan.

There probably more to this than he posted.

I am opposed to divorce from a moral view in almost all circumstances. However, when divorcing I don't think that a wife (or husband) deserves nothing. There are situations when they might. I agree...when one of them supports the other so the other can accumulate assets that have value, those assets should be divided. But enticing a person to the altar does not entitle you to jack squat

I understand the point you are making. In general, I agree. But his grandfather may have had health issues that she was unable to handle. So? How does that affect my earlier point? Furthermore, she may have had her own health issues or needed more care than he was able or willing to give her. If so, her family may have moved her out in order to have her cared for properly. And she may have been entitled $250K. Tell me a scenario where a someone is entitled to the fruits of another's labor whne they have done nothing to help them earn it. Go on. I am intrigued.We don't have enough information to actually make that judgment.

Or they might just have been greedy.

---

I love how you tentatively jump to defend the woman....knowing that based on the situation she's most likely a piece of work, who is totally taking advantage of a family law system designed to benefit women.....and you do this solely because she's a woman.

Then you find out the truth and have to walk it back.

Yep

Ags4DaWin said:

---

combat wombat said:

---

B-1 83 said:

---

No, he was pretty independent and continued to live out there for another 3+ years by himself. She had her own place and pension, and none of that money should have been hers. It was all his investments.

---

WELL, THEN, THAT SUCKS.

---

combat wombat said:

---

You have no idea whether she brought anything into the marriage. Ho back and read my post. Nowhere did I assume that she brought no assets into the marriage. That was 100% projection by you. You automatically assume that I am a misogynist and ran with it. They were married 22 years. That's less than $1,000/month. Did she cook most of his meals, clean his house, wash his clothes? Did she get a SS check every month that covered most of her expenses? Even if she never worked, if she was a widow she would have been entitled to survivor benefits. Did she work at all, even part-time? Umm....what does any of that matter? You have two people living together, retired. They are bringing all the assets they accumulated prior to retirement into the marriage. They split living expenses however long they split them. You are ASSUMING she did housework. How sexist of you. Regardless of that fact, if you are retired it is highly unlikely that you are working to accumulate more wealth. Most states and most prenups explicitly state that community property is wealth and assets accumulated after the marriage. And IDGAF how much cooking and cleaning she did, she doesn't deserve the wealth a person accumulated over the course of their life (at the expense of their progeny) just because she came along after retirement. She did nothing. NOTHING. To help support him in the accumulation of those assets. Enticing a person to marry you doesn't entitled you to the wealth they accumulated prior to meeting you. What did she do to earn that?

Assuming she's not entitled to some assets in a divorce is dumb. Even I admitted she might be the spawn of Satan.

There probably more to this than he posted.

I am opposed to divorce from a moral view in almost all circumstances. However, when divorcing I don't think that a wife (or husband) deserves nothing. There are situations when they might. I agree...when one of them supports the other so the other can accumulate assets that have value, those assets should be divided. But enticing a person to the altar does not entitle you to jack squat

I understand the point you are making. In general, I agree. But his grandfather may have had health issues that she was unable to handle. So? How does that affect my earlier point? Furthermore, she may have had her own health issues or needed more care than he was able or willing to give her. If so, her family may have moved her out in order to have her cared for properly. And she may have been entitled $250K. Tell me a scenario where a someone is entitled to the fruits of another's labor whne they have done nothing to help them earn it. Go on. I am intrigued.We don't have enough information to actually make that judgment.

Or they might just have been greedy.

---

I love how you tentatively jump to defend the woman....knowing that based on the situation she's most likely a piece of work, who is totally taking advantage of a family law system designed to benefit women.....and you do this solely because she's a woman.

Then you find out the truth and have to walk it back.

---

Yawn. I'm not replying to this beyond the paragraph below.

I didn't assume you were a misogynist. I assumed you were being UNFAIR. The work women do at home has value. I was assuming she may have earned some of the assets she walked away with, especially if he wasn't supporting her 100%.

You sure like that word assuming, don'tcha…

Not generally.

combat wombat said:

---

Ags4DaWin said:

---

combat wombat said:

---

B-1 83 said:

---

No, he was pretty independent and continued to live out there for another 3+ years by himself. She had her own place and pension, and none of that money should have been hers. It was all his investments.

---

WELL, THEN, THAT SUCKS.

---

combat wombat said:

---

You have no idea whether she brought anything into the marriage. Ho back and read my post. Nowhere did I assume that she brought no assets into the marriage. That was 100% projection by you. You automatically assume that I am a misogynist and ran with it. They were married 22 years. That's less than $1,000/month. Did she cook most of his meals, clean his house, wash his clothes? Did she get a SS check every month that covered most of her expenses? Even if she never worked, if she was a widow she would have been entitled to survivor benefits. Did she work at all, even part-time? Umm....what does any of that matter? You have two people living together, retired. They are bringing all the assets they accumulated prior to retirement into the marriage. They split living expenses however long they split them. You are ASSUMING she did housework. How sexist of you. Regardless of that fact, if you are retired it is highly unlikely that you are working to accumulate more wealth. Most states and most prenups explicitly state that community property is wealth and assets accumulated after the marriage. And IDGAF how much cooking and cleaning she did, she doesn't deserve the wealth a person accumulated over the course of their life (at the expense of their progeny) just because she came along after retirement. She did nothing. NOTHING. To help support him in the accumulation of those assets. Enticing a person to marry you doesn't entitled you to the wealth they accumulated prior to meeting you. What did she do to earn that?

Assuming she's not entitled to some assets in a divorce is dumb. Even I admitted she might be the spawn of Satan.

There probably more to this than he posted.

I am opposed to divorce from a moral view in almost all circumstances. However, when divorcing I don't think that a wife (or husband) deserves nothing. There are situations when they might. I agree...when one of them supports the other so the other can accumulate assets that have value, those assets should be divided. But enticing a person to the altar does not entitle you to jack squat

I understand the point you are making. In general, I agree. But his grandfather may have had health issues that she was unable to handle. So? How does that affect my earlier point? Furthermore, she may have had her own health issues or needed more care than he was able or willing to give her. If so, her family may have moved her out in order to have her cared for properly. And she may have been entitled $250K. Tell me a scenario where a someone is entitled to the fruits of another's labor whne they have done nothing to help them earn it. Go on. I am intrigued.We don't have enough information to actually make that judgment.

Or they might just have been greedy.

---

I love how you tentatively jump to defend the woman....knowing that based on the situation she's most likely a piece of work, who is totally taking advantage of a family law system designed to benefit women.....and you do this solely because she's a woman.

Then you find out the truth and have to walk it back.

---

Yawn. I'm not replying to this beyond the paragraph below.

I didn't assume you were a misogynist. I assumed you were being UNFAIR. The work women do at home has value. I was assuming she may have earned some of the assets she walked away with, especially if he wasn't supporting her 100%.

---

What work? Raising their already grown kids?

combat wombat said:

---

Ags4DaWin said:

---

combat wombat said:

---

B-1 83 said:

---

No, he was pretty independent and continued to live out there for another 3+ years by himself. She had her own place and pension, and none of that money should have been hers. It was all his investments.

---

WELL, THEN, THAT SUCKS.

---

combat wombat said:

---

You have no idea whether she brought anything into the marriage. Ho back and read my post. Nowhere did I assume that she brought no assets into the marriage. That was 100% projection by you. You automatically assume that I am a misogynist and ran with it. They were married 22 years. That's less than $1,000/month. Did she cook most of his meals, clean his house, wash his clothes? Did she get a SS check every month that covered most of her expenses? Even if she never worked, if she was a widow she would have been entitled to survivor benefits. Did she work at all, even part-time? Umm....what does any of that matter? You have two people living together, retired. They are bringing all the assets they accumulated prior to retirement into the marriage. They split living expenses however long they split them. You are ASSUMING she did housework. How sexist of you. Regardless of that fact, if you are retired it is highly unlikely that you are working to accumulate more wealth. Most states and most prenups explicitly state that community property is wealth and assets accumulated after the marriage. And IDGAF how much cooking and cleaning she did, she doesn't deserve the wealth a person accumulated over the course of their life (at the expense of their progeny) just because she came along after retirement. She did nothing. NOTHING. To help support him in the accumulation of those assets. Enticing a person to marry you doesn't entitled you to the wealth they accumulated prior to meeting you. What did she do to earn that?

Assuming she's not entitled to some assets in a divorce is dumb. Even I admitted she might be the spawn of Satan.

There probably more to this than he posted.

I am opposed to divorce from a moral view in almost all circumstances. However, when divorcing I don't think that a wife (or husband) deserves nothing. There are situations when they might. I agree...when one of them supports the other so the other can accumulate assets that have value, those assets should be divided. But enticing a person to the altar does not entitle you to jack squat

I understand the point you are making. In general, I agree. But his grandfather may have had health issues that she was unable to handle. So? How does that affect my earlier point? Furthermore, she may have had her own health issues or needed more care than he was able or willing to give her. If so, her family may have moved her out in order to have her cared for properly. And she may have been entitled $250K. Tell me a scenario where a someone is entitled to the fruits of another's labor whne they have done nothing to help them earn it. Go on. I am intrigued.We don't have enough information to actually make that judgment.

Or they might just have been greedy.

---

I love how you tentatively jump to defend the woman....knowing that based on the situation she's most likely a piece of work, who is totally taking advantage of a family law system designed to benefit women.....and you do this solely because she's a woman.

Then you find out the truth and have to walk it back.

---

Yawn. I'm not replying to this beyond the paragraph below.

I didn't assume you were a misogynist. I assumed you were being UNFAIR. The work women do at home has value. I was assuming she may have earned some of the assets she walked away with, especially if he wasn't supporting her 100%.

---

Work at home does have value. She was probably "paid" with a roof over her head, food on the table, a car to drive, clothes, spending money, health insurance, etc.. When she leaves her "work place" and quits working why should she get a quarter mil?