Marriage financial agreement

id mention the prenup before marriage

have a sitdown and talk about it like adults. State that while you DO INDEED want to marry her you also want to protect your family assets in case either of you decide that marriage was a mistake later on and want out

One of three things will happen if you do this:

>A- she starts screaming and ranting about HOW COULD YOU! or YOU THINK IM AFTER YOUR MONEY?!! MAN UP!!!

>B- she leaves you

>C- shes fine with it

if A or B are true count yourself lucky. She was after your money. If C then wait a bit and give her a good ol fashioned surprise marriage proposal.\


BE FOREWARNED though, as certain places Prenups have been being thrown at at an ever increasingly rate.

I cant help you bro but u would have to talk to a lawyer right? Might as well talk to that lawyer now...

U culd also casually ask her would u sign a prenup to marry me me?


I wuld just say this tho friend. Just because u have a prenup doesnt mean shes going to marry u for free. So u still are going to need to offer her a lot of money in that prenup.

Tell her before.

If I was proposed to and then my fiance sprung this on me afterwards I'd be upset. It's sort of like lying because now you're making conditions after the fact.

>>17725736
GOod point I would do what this chick says.


Also Id just ask her directly if she would sign a prenup then ask her to marry u a little after she its still a surprise

>>17725702
Discuss about it before asking her to marry you.

Ask her if she'd be fine with it. Usually if people have been staying together for years, they already talked about getting married and stuff. Or, at least, me and my SO sometimes joke about "when we'll be married" or "at our wedding" stuff.
It's, like, something we know it's going to happen even if we aren't engaged.

>>17725702
Most bitches show their true colors once you bring up the prenup.

>>17725751
I honestly wouldn't sign a prenup.
We're promising each other to stay together and love each other till we die and you start our marriage by telling me you basically do not believe in what you're promising me, do not trust my promise to you, and ultimately think I am a bitch after money.
I'd rather not get married than sign a prenup.

>>17725764
This.

I might compromise to just having a ceremony or whatever if he wanted and put on a show for the families but I wouldn't actually sign anything legally binding us as spouses.

File: ngnl2.jpg (23KB, 320x299px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 320x299px

>>17725702
> My family has a fair bit of money that Ill inherit, along with stocks, small businesses etc.
If you inherit post marriage, a prenup will not protect you.

Prenuptual agreements are just that - PREnuptual. Any assets/inheritance gained during the marriage are fair game to split, depending on the laws of your US brostate, r the third world shithole you call Canada.

Remember, if she marries and you fuck the businesses up, she's also liable for the debts of the business. So she's taking a chance too.

My advice? Man up and go in this for life, not just a starter marriage.

>>17725764
>We're promising each other to stay together and love each other till we die and you start our marriage by telling me you basically do not believe in what you're promising me
But this isnt true. When you sign the marriage contract you are agreeing to the terms of the contract in case of the divorce. The way I see it, by not signing the prenup you are saying that the divorce laws in place are fine. Which I do not agree with. Im not about to sign a contract I dont believe in. It has nothing to do with trust.
>>17725736
A prenup is part of the marriage though. If I had talked about it a long time ago about our thoughts on prenup it could have been separate from actually getting married, but thats not possible now. Telling her about a prenup now is just proposing but instead of doing it with a ring Id be doing it with a prenup. Thats not how I want that to go. In fact it sounds so bad Id rather her believe I lied to her.

>>17725788
>Thats not how I want that to go
That's how it's going to go anyway.

>Marry me, but first, let's plan our divorce.

That's what a prenup is. It doesn't really matter when you ask her.

>>17725770
So youd only sign a legally binding martial financial contract written by someone else and not the person you are supposed to be marrying? I dont get that mindset.

>>17725702
If you are in the USA, spend a few hundred on a. hour long consult with a general practice lawyer (not a divorce attorney) to get some basic advice.
Laws vary by state, that said:
In the USA, inheritances are often separate property as long as you don't comingle the assets. e.g., you get your dads house, you sell it, and buy a new house with the money=she can likely take a portion of the house as the money is comingled.

As for a prenup, it may be worth it if you have steady jobs and pre-marriage assets that arn't inheritances but do note that both you and her will need different lawyers for the prenup to be valid. This could cost between 5k to 12k.
A lot of divorce attorneys discuss the 'theraputic' value of talking over things with a prenup but divorce attorneys have a monetary incentive to think prenups are great.

>>17725794
>That's how it's going to go anyway.
Only if I ask about the prenup first which Im not.
>Marry me, but first, let's plan our divorce.
If you cant accept that divorce laws are part of marriage then argue to get them removed from martial contracts. The only difference with a prenup is that when you sign the financial contract its one you believe in and not one someone else made up from archaic standards.

>>17725795
I'm talking about a marriage license. The thing that makes you legally husband and wife

>>17725798
I am aware that prenups have a hard time holding up in court. Im not too worried about that. This is where trusting your spouse comes into place. I know Id uphold any contract that I sign with my further spouse in the case of divorce, which includes default contracts like giving half up of your assets obtained premarriage.

>>17725807
That marriage license serves as a financially binding contract as well as defined by what the law stipulates of a married couple.

>>17725788
When you marry someone you make a vow. The vow is to love and care after each other "till death do us part".
It is not just a contract between two adults about mutual financial responsibilities, it is a promise you make to each other and in front of the community to care and love each other. The meaning of marriage isn't "we share our assets and provide financially for each other till one of us decides that we're done", it is "we stay together till the day we die, whatever happens".
The prenup to me is against the meaning of marriage. I'd rather do not get married and receive a promise which ultimately doesn't mean anything to you than get married knowing you don't think we're staying together and you don't trust me enough to know I am not a bitch.

If you live in a non-common law marriage state, just cohabitate, get power of attorney, purchase a house with a contract drafted to protect both of you, and set up a trust fund that will protect both of you for contingencies related to retirement, disability, kids, etc.

Then have a marriage ceremony but don't get legally married. Easy.

>>17725823
OP upholds contracts only apparently, not vows. Lucky girl, his gf.

>>17725823
>It is not just a contract between two adults about mutual financial responsibilities
This is impossible since divorce laws are written into the marriage. You CANNOT get married without their existence. Itd be nice if you could be you simply cannot.

It seems that you do not understand the fact that a marriage is a financially binding contract. If you dont understand that you shouldnt get married. Thats my belief on the matter.

>>17725838
Its post like this which tells me you arent thinking reasonably.

>>17725858
You're the one not thinking reasonably.

There's no good reason to get married in the first place if all it is to you is a financial agreement for an arrangement that will one day run its course.

>>17725866
Thats why I said you arent thinking reasonably. Recognizing that a marriage is in fact a financially binding agreement doesnt mean thats all it is. You cant just ignore parts of a contract you dont like and sign away.

>>17725702
OP, talking from experience, don't get married. Especially if the reason is "she's dropping hints."
You should get married because it's your decision and that's it. Don't get pressured by anyone.
The way marriage laws are now, men get screwed. And there is no real reason to get married in the first place. Next time she hints at marriage ask her for a real reason to get married. I bet she doesn't have one besides "to prove our love" or "because that's what's supposed to happen." It's all bullshit.

>>17725885
>doesnt mean thats all it is
That's exactly what anon you just replied to tried to say and you said they didn't understand. And you don't seem to understand the other side so you're making it pretty clear that's all that matters to you.

>>17725702
>this bait again

ITT virgin shmucks who don't realize almost half of marriages in America end in divorce, and girls who don't realize a prenup protects them as well.
>>17725823
Nice fantasy, bro. "Til death do us part" is quite rare these days.

I am a married woman, been married for 5 together for 10 years. As a financially independent woman with my own car and bank accounts, I wanted a prenup as much as my husband because to protect us. We also married young right at or before the average age of manifestation of severe mental illness (early 20s for things like BPD and schizophrenia), so we also agreed to prenup because I've seen marriages fall apart from it firsthand.

Husband with dementia beat one of my patients within an inch of her life, when he'd never laid a single hand on her or said a harsh word in their 47 years of marriage prior. He went crazy with finances too, making wierd purchases, forgetting bills, draining and closing random accounts. They never divorced. She died before he did in the nursing home, I believe from sorrow, stress, and residual damage from the beating. Seeing that shit changed me.

I'd never leave my dementia husband physically, but I would sever the legal part of the marriage if he started doing that to protect us both.
>>17725866
No matter your religious or moral feelings, the government has certain stipulations and benefits to marriage in the form of a paper contract lisence. Vows are the metaphysical part. My husband and I were mentally married (guess it could be called that) for like 3-5 years before we married in the government's eyes. We lived together, did everything married couples did in all but name. Then when he landed in the ICU, I was not allowed because I wasn't a spouse. We had no family close by. That struck it further in to me that modern marriage is a financial and law abiding agreement, not a display of love and affection. Ignoring how the government defines your own marriage is stupid.

>>17725850
>It seems that you do not understand the fact that a marriage is a financially binding contract.
I obviously do, which is why I said "It is not *just* a contract [...]" meaning that, yes, when you marry legally you accept a contract which includes financial responsibilities.

What I am insisting on is that the institution of marriage is about trusting and loving each other till death. The vow you make is about loving and caring about each other till the day you die. The reason why you get married should be that you find a person that you want to spend the rest of your life with.
Getting a prenup, while perfectly reasonable under a financial sense, is against the very institution of marriage because
(1) you're saying that you think it's possible that you or your partner are going to break your promise, which is reasonable, but still I wouldn't make a promise I don't think I'll keep;
(2) you aren't fully convinced that she won't fuck you over if she got the chance, which is reasonable, but wouldn't marry someone I don't trust blindly while promising I trust them blindly, and clearly lying.

Hate to break it to you but prenups get thrown out of court all the time.

>>17725890
>That's exactly what anon you just replied to tried to say and you said they didn't understand.
No that anon said I was saying thats all it is. Please follow the conversation.

OP, ask for the prenup. Plain and simple. It's an uncomfortable request, which is why many people don't do it, but many of those who neglect the prenup live to regret it. It's better to be safe than sorry.

If a prenup is the difference between her marrying you or not, she wasn't the one anyway, imo.

>>17725905
What did you get married for, if you don't believe in the promise you made?
And you clearly do not, if you think that you need to protect yourself from your partner and you'd leave them if they got sick.

I am not saying it is unreasonable to not believe in marriage till death, I do not believe in that either, I'm saying it is stupid to get married just to throw a big party if the vow you're making doesn't mean anything to you.

>>17725913
No, they weren't. See >>17725907
for why you're wrong.

Please work on your reading comprehension.

>>17725889
>Especially if the reason is "she's dropping hints."
Its not. Its just why I assume she'll say yes and not a pipe dream that Im over thinking.
There are many reasons to get married. For every one focusing solely on the vow a common law marriage does that. But the financial side to a marriage is a huge part of it. If something were to happen to me my wife would gain control over my possessions because its part of the financially binding parts of the marriage. However in a common law marriage they dont go to her necessarily but maybe next of kin.

>>17725808
I really want you to talk to a general practice lawyer or estate lawyer for a brief consult. You may need to talk to your parents so they can financially structure your inheritance. You need to be able to plan and speak knowledgably.
Your parents providing an inheritance in the form of a legally ironclad trust fund may be FAR better than a prenup alone. Depending on the state, your wife could get shares or control over businesses, this can be made less likely via restructuring the businesses, etc.

>>17725923
>if all it is to you is a financial agreement for an arrangement
This is what that anon said to me. Please follow the conversation.

>>17725921
Read, man

>I'd never leave him physically, but I'd sever the financial part of the marriage if he started doing shit

The reason I got married is because of shit like I stated in the post, not being able to visit him in the ICU and other shit like that.

Goddamn read

>>17725907

1) It is reasonable to admit that you can't forsee the future and at least acknowledge the possibility that the marriage will last forever. Realists and pragmatic people recognize the possibility instead of indulging in the retarded fantasy that marriage is an unshakable bond that nothing can break.

2) People change. The person you are marrying now will be different 30 years from now, as will you. Tons of unforseen circumstances can change how you see that person and how that person sees you. You're admitting that the requests are reasonable, but at the same time doing away with reason because of the silly romantic notion that "love trumps all, til death do us part" and all that crap.

Look at how many people have made the same mistake for the same reason. Look at the divorce rates in our day and age.

>>17725927
Hey if you want to get married go for it. But everything you get from marriage can be gained through other legal means. Good luck dude.
My only advice for you and her is don't get too comfortable. It kills marriages everytime.

>>17725928
Im aware of all of this. Im not asking for prenup advice. Hell any prenup signed without a lawyer from both parties will 100% be thrown out of court. Im asking for advice on presenting it to her.

>>17725947
There is no advice. You just sit down with her and have the talk. Stop being a pussy. If it was easy it wouldn't be such a big deal.

>>17725937
The anon that I was referring to was the one that said exactly what I said they said. Try context clues next time. It would have been easy to deduce which post I was talking about.

>Please follow the conversation.

yet you can't even tell when you're talking to the same person.

Please follow the conversation.

>>17725944
Right. This is why it's better to just not get married.

>>17725907
>Getting a prenup, while perfectly reasonable under a financial sense, is against the very institution of marriage because
No this is just nonsense. Not getting a prenup is accepting the divorce terms laid out in place. You either accept the terms already there or you make some new ones (that will probably be thrown out). There is no magical third option where you dont have to think about divorce. That is just negligently signing financially binding contracts that you will have to uphold even if you dont believe in them.
>(1) you're saying that you think it's possible that you or your partner are going to break your promise, which is reasonable, but still I wouldn't make a promise I don't think I'll keep;
It is possible that she will want to leave. Im not a fool to believe that a divorce is impossible. But thats not why Im asking for a prenup. The prenup is solely in response to the divorce laws already in place. If I have to sign a contract that financially binds me in case of divorce its going to be one I believe in. If divorce laws didnt exist I wouldnt concern myself with a prenup.
>(2) you aren't fully convinced that she won't fuck you over if she got the chance, which is reasonable, but wouldn't marry someone I don't trust blindly while promising I trust them blindly, and clearly lying.
Its not getting fucked over when you sign a contract that legally gives her possession of half of you assets in case of divorce. If you didnt want ot do that in case of divorce why would you sign a contract that does that.

What you are arguing for is negligence. You cannot dismiss the financially binding contract written into marriage. It is there and theres nothing you can do about it. What you advocate is to just accept the ones that come with marriage. Because that is what you sign when you dont get a prenup.
If ALL you care about are the vows, get a common law marriage so the government has no say and you can ignore divorce laws.

>>17725944
I am saying that, financially, I understand why you say that it is responsible to sign a prenup.
But I am also saying that the institution of marriage doesn't allow for terms and condition, and it's a vow till death do us part. You clearly do not believe in the vow if you sign a prenup. If you don't believe in the vow, then do not get married at all.
If getting married is a mistake, and you cannot be sure you're staying with them till they die, and they might change in 30 years, and you don't feel like you're sure you'll stay with them till they die, don't fucking go and get married.
What's the point? What are you getting married for? To throw a big party and waste 50k$ on food and nice dresses? To get better taxation?
If you don't believe in the institution of marriage, which is completely reasonable, do not get married. No one forces you. It's not illegal to stay with a person without signing a contract or putting a ring on their finger.

>>17725955
Your reply was a critique of my reply to their post. Theres nothing to deduce, either you clicked the wrong post or you didnt follow the conversation.

>>17725989
>But I am also saying that the institution of marriage doesn't allow for terms and condition, and it's a vow till death do us part. You clearly do not believe in the vow if you sign a prenup
Youre not replying to me but just in case you are under the impression that you are, you post is false since divorce laws are written into the marriage. Saying that its against the institution of marriage while signing a contract that does just that is 100% hypocritical on your end. Common law marriages exist for people like you.

>>17725902
Are you honestly trying to imply that anyone who gets a prenup is a troll?

>>17726011
Obviously not, but this shit seem to resurface all the time here, with a very similar opening post (even the same picture I think) and OP baiting people into talking about prenups and not how to solve HIS problem at hand.

>>17725947
Get couples counseling for a few sessions. Talk about stuff. When you get used to talking frankly then maybe you can bring up a prenup.
I think couples counseling is always a good idea pre marriage.

>>17726027
Can you find said post with similar images and opening post. The image is one of the first on google so its easy to see how thats reused but the same opening post would be more interesting.

>>17725983
You can avoid signing a contract you don't agree with. It's not absolutely necessary to get married.
I am not saying it is necessarily bad to ask for a prenup, just saying that to me it would make the vow and the wedding empty and meaningless.

If wedding is a ceremony where you say in front of the community and perhaps God that you'll love me forever, but we are already contemplating the possibility that the promise is going to be broken, it makes your promise empty.

>It is possible that she will want to leave.
Reasonable, but then you don't believe the promise she is making you and ultimately do not trust her. Hence, wedding is just a nice party.

>>17726007
I am not talking about the contract of marriage itself (again) but about marriage as an institution.

>>17726036
>Reasonable, but then you don't believe the promise she is making you and ultimately do not trust her. Hence, wedding is just a nice party.
This isnt even logical. If someone promises you something it will always be possible that they change their mind later. That doesnt mean you have to believe that they will change their mind later. What you are describing sounds like a controlling fantasy.
>just saying that to me it would make the vow and the wedding empty and meaningless.
So by this logic you agree that signing a marriage contract which has divorce laws implicit in them makes the marriage empty and meaningless. And that common law marriages are the only solution. Because otherwise you stance is hypocritical.
>I am not talking about the contract of marriage itself (again) but about marriage as an institution.
So you think that the contract of marriage is against the institution of marriage?

>>17726034
My bad, not that similar on the second look

http://archive.4plebs.org/adv/search/text/prenup/type/op/

outside of OP abandoning the actually question quite early in most

>>17726028
OP here. 2 points
1) there are very few post addressing the question I made in the OP. Everyone in this thread for the most part ignored it except for people like>>17726028
2) I have abandoned it. The extreme reaction given by most people in this thread is represent the possibility of my gfs reaction to it. If I cant uphold my stance against the criticism given here then I shouldnt mention the prenup.

>>17726028
Is this before or after asking her to marry me. We're pretty happy right now so asking her for couples therapy seems a little out of the blue and Im sure it would be met with some adversity. Not that I dont think marriage counseling is a bad idea. While I dont think its particularly needed (other than my clear underlying reason for it) its not something I would probably do unless it was for someone I was going to marry. It just seems like a thing marriage related. Which brings me back to believing it should be done after proposing.

>>17726047
>If someone promises you something it will always be possible that they change their mind later.
If you believe someone's promise, you do believe that they won't change your mind and will stick to their word. That's the whole point of someone promising you to do something. Otherwise you don't trust the promise they're making, and them.

>So by this logic you agree that signing a marriage contract which has divorce laws implicit in them makes the marriage empty and meaningless.
No. Getting married in a system that allows for divorce is not contrasting with the promise you are making.
It is different to passively accept that getting divorced is a possibility law gives you and actively seek to protect yourself in case of divorce.

>>17726047
You even said yourself before, it would be nice if you could sign a marriage contract without divorce stipulations, but you can't.

Theoretically, they shouldn't matter anyway because the idea is not not ever get divorced so it doesn't matter if they're in the marriage contract or not. So, it isn't hypocritical. Getting a prenup is going above and beyond to cover your ass.

>>17726095
>If you believe someone's promise, you do believe that they won't change your mind and will stick to their word.
Thats not the same thing as saying they cant change their mind. Which is always true and you can ignore that. Especially while signing a contract that states what happens if they change their mind.
>Getting married in a system that allows for divorce is not contrasting with the promise you are making.
Its not allowing for divorce. Its writing in what happens.
>It is different to passively accept that getting divorced is a possibility law gives you and actively seek to protect yourself in case of divorce.
Alright I fulheartedly believe this is bullshit. I have no intention of passively accepting a financially binding agreement and I feel as though anyone who would ignore its existence is a fool exercising negligence and definitely not ready for married if they cant act responsibly in the contracts they sign.

>>17726102
This doesnt make sense and its exactly why divorce laws exist.
>it doesnt matter so sign the contract financially binding you anon
I feel like Im being trolled. If you dont want to financially binding parts of the marriage then do common law marriage. I dont think ever part of the financially binding contract is bad and in most cases I agree. Just not with the divorce laws.

>>17726110
Then why would you even consider telling her AFTER your proposal?

You are asking her to enter into this contract with you before disclosing the terms. Wouldn't that be irresponsible?

Talk about a hypocrite.

>>17725823
>If someone wants a prenup it's only because they think I'm a gold digging bitch
hmmmm

>>17725866
>Thoughtfully considering the financial implications of marriage now means it's the only thing you're concerned about.
Why are you so stupid?

You aint no punk you hollard you want prenup.
Theres really no subtle way to ask just be straight up you. Know
You protecting whats yours no shame in that

>>17726123
Because the proposal isnt a binding contract with the stipulations laid out. I admit that in its execution it would be blindsiding her, but you dont talk about how the marriage would be handled before being engaged. You do that while engaged. There are many details to sort out before the marriage happens other than what happens in the case of divorce. Talking about a prenup before talking about say buying a house together would say that Im thinking about the divorce more than any other part of the marriage preparations. Which isnt true at all. Ive been thinking about a house for a long time especially since we now both have stable jobs. But thats not what this thread is about.

>>17726154
>I admit that in its execution it would be blindsiding her
Exactly. And this is a shitty thing to do to someone.

So figure out which is more important to you. Having her on board before you propose or having a prenup be a deal breaker after she initially says yes.

You can either have cake or eat it. Not both.

>>17726163
Not as shitty as proposing to someone with a prenup. Which is why Im not doing that.
Though i guess talking about it in conjunction to all of the other things needed to be prepared for in a marriage would make it less blindsiding. Though if pre proposal then itd be the sole reason for talking about it.

>>17725927
make a will in that case, not a valid reason to get married

>>17726182
This is the best option for OP imo

Get common-law married and leave a will for your wife to inherit your stuff if you die.

>>17726182
Theres far more reasons. And Im too young to think about a will lol. The marriage contract serves more as a dynamic will then me writing a shitty one in my twenties.

>>17726110
>Thats not the same thing as saying they cant change their mind.
Changing your mind means breaking the promise. The whole point of making a promise is keeping it.

>Its not allowing for divorce. Its writing in what happens.
The contract of marriage is not the institution of marriage.
The contract of marriage, like every other contract, explicitly says what happens in case you break the contract.
The institution of marriage itself is based on the promise that you will stay together and care about each other till death.
By asking your partner for a prenup you are implying that you do not believe that the promise you're making to each other is true, and you need an extra protection in case it happens because you don't trust their words or them as human beings.
By passively accepting the responsibilities in case you break the contract you do not.

>I have no intention of passively accepting a financially binding agreement
Then do not sign it.

>I feel as though anyone who would ignore its existence is a fool exercising negligence and definitely not ready for married if they cant act responsibly in the contracts they sign.
It's your opinion. I feel like we're both entitled to have an opinion even if it contrasting.

>>17726195
You should realize that keeping future finances "separate from the marriage" is unfeasible and unrealistic. When you're married to someone their finances become your problems too. A pre-nuptual agreement only dictates what happens when a marriage fails. But if you have these businesses fall into your hands while you're married, that's risk and burden on her as well, so, even if you did get divorced I don't even think it's fair to say she should get none of what she had stake in. That point aside, it seems like your goals of just keeping everything entirely separate are just antithetical to marriage so you should reconsider it entirely.

>>17726214
>people cant break promises
What world do live in
>The contract of marriage is not the institution of marriage.
Then why sign it if you dont want those parts of the contract
>The contract of marriage, like every other contract, explicitly says what happens in case you break the contract.
And this is something you leave to someone else to decide?
>By asking your partner for a prenup you are implying that you do not believe that the promise you're making to each other is true,
illogical and Im tired of saying why. Stipulating terms does not mean you think they are going to happen. Especially in a case where the term MUST be stipulated. Just shows how unreasonable you are being.
>By passively accepting the responsibilities in case you break the contract you do not.
False. Ive been going through those threads that person posted and there is an amazing point in it.
I think the words were that if the divorce stipulation was that the woman was sold into the sex trade youd never sign it saying that its better to passively accept it especially if you had the ability to write that out of the contract.
Its not that we have contrasting opinions. Its honestly that you are a hypocrite.

>>17726216
I didnt say everything. Just the things that are. Such as assets obtained before marriage which I explicitly stated. Sharing things during the marriage is fine. But claiming that they are yours if a divorce happens is ridiculous.

>>17726237
You said you'll inherit those assets. That means you haven't "obtained them" before marriage and I don't see how a prenup could even apply.

Wait til you inherit them then, then get married.

>>17726258
>6. Protect an Inheritance. If one spouse (or both) expects an inheritance during a marriage, a prenuptial agreement can include provisions that state the inherited assets will remain the property of the inheriting spouse—so long as the inheritance is kept separate from community property.

>>17726214
No woman could actually believe this right

any couple that signs a prenup looks like a shitty fucking couple. it also makes the man look like an insecure bitch. it's not worth it. leave the relationship if you're a woman and your man is that fucking dumb.

>>17725770
in many places this means you are married by common law and therefore still bonafide married

Ok holy shit this thread

as if there aren't women with assets who would prefer a prenup as well

is every woman on /adv/ is a poor loser who desperately needs to marry into money and is now projecting that into this thread or something

>>17726944
>signing half your valuables away because it makes you look insecure
Yeah nothing wrong with that mentality.

File: 1392131346515.gif (2MB, 347x200px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 347x200px

>>17725702

I don't get it. If marriage is a "contract" like every dude in this thread says and you don't like the terms of the "contract" then why are you getting married?

How about you don't get married? Then you don't have to make her sign a prenup, she won't feel betrayed, you won't have to worry about your money and you get to stay together.

If you're so disillusioned with the institution of marriage and so worried about how you're going to pull it off and not lose any money why the fuck are you doing it?

You do realize that it defeats the purpose of getting married if you still want to keep the stuff you want "separate from the marriage", right? The whole point of marriage is to conjoin everything. If you don't want to conjoin everything then I'm genuinely confused as to why you're still insistent on getting married.

I don't understand. Just don't get married? This is really a simple issue thats turned into another giant /r9k/ rage thread.

>>17727037
The contract is just part of marriage. And you are allowed to alter that contract with a prenup. Whats not to get?

>>17727037
>You do realize that it defeats the purpose of getting married if you still want to keep the stuff you want "separate from the marriage", right?
Women logic here. Marriage is all about getting rights to possessions that arent yours.

>>17727048

I'm sorry, I think its just being purposefully dumb to think that marriage is simply a contract. It isn't. Its literally the only contract in the world where you have to have sex with, start a family and love the person you're signing it with.

The answer is no, you're not really allowed to alter the contract. If you don't like the contract, don't sign it. I really don't understand why marriage is a necessity to OP if he really doesnt want to completely join his life with someone.

Just don't get married. He gets to keep all of his money. I understand where he's coming from but I also would understand someone coming to me and saying "Hey, I love you, I want to spend the rest of my life with you but I'm also going to have to have you to sign this so you get nothing if we break up."

Kind of a shitty way to start a life together. I dunno. I don't really fall on either side, I just don't get why, if you're so unhappy with the institution of marriage, you're trying to get married.

>>17727061
>I'm sorry, I think its just being purposefully dumb to think that marriage is simply a contract.
Well since you are the only one saying that Ill assume thats a self reflection.
>The answer is no, you're not really allowed to alter the contract.
My sides, that was actually funny.

>>17725702
Talk about it, but don't mention you want to marry her. Drop hints you want to tie the knot, but don't say. Next time finances come up talk about how you'd want to protect what you're inheriting and what you own now with a pre-nup.

>>17727061
> "Hey, I love you, I want to spend the rest of my life with you but I'm also going to have to have you to sign this so I get half your possessions if we break up."
Women every time.

>>17727061
>institution of marriage = financially giving half of every thing you own away
This is why prenups exist. To catch gold diggers like you.

>>17727061
>Its literally the only contract in the world where you have to have sex with, start a family and love the person you're signing it with.
You dont need marriage for any of that.

File: 1377757889506.gif (836KB, 300x212px) Image search: [Google]

836KB, 300x212px

>>17727087

First off, I'm a man. I know it throws off your whole narrative to not be able to discard my opinions by calling me a woman but its true. Sorry, I disagree with you and you're going to have to do a better job of defending your opinions then just yelling "WOMAN."

Secondly, it depends on what kind of life you live. If you both have careers and jobs and means of living on your own then keeping assets separately doesn't seem like such a crazy idea,

BUT

if you're asking your wife to raise your kids, put her career dreams on hold, maybe move to a different city or country with you and also sign a prenup you're asking her to take a risk that you're not willing to take.

You're basically creating a marriage in which you hold all of the leverage because in the back of her mind she knows that if she doesn't do the right thing and you leave her you can take her entire life with her and leave her a 40, 50 year old woman with no career or marketable skill.

You're asking her to take the risk that you might up and leave her with nothing later in her life but you're not willing to take the risk that she might leave you and take some of your money in the process.

That's a really bullshit thing to ask someone to do which is WHY I just keep suggesting that OP not get married.

Women don't want to dedicate their entire lives to keeping your house, raising your children and cooking your meals just so you can one day up and leave her an old woman without a cent to her name. Its a trade off; she risks sacrificing her career aspirations and money making potential and you risk sacrificing some money.

Its a dual risk. A partnership. The DEFINITION of marriage.

>>17727080

If you can't understand the concept that no woman wants to get married to you if she's the only one with anything to lose if the marriage doesn't work out then you have no business getting married.

A partnership is not asking your partner to shoulder all the risk of getting married and not accepting any risk of your own. You get to walk away with all your money, your house and your assets and she gets to walk away being a single, middle aged woman without career, a home or the life she started with you.

Thats why alimony exists, gentlemen.

>>17727080
Most of the time it's the man that proposes so the woman is not the one "having" the man sign anything.

>>17727154
>>17727142
The bait attempt was impressive but in the end underwhelming. You baited too hard with alimony and you sounds too much like a gold digger for anyone to seriously bite.

>>17727142
>Its a dual risk. A partnership. The DEFINITION of marriage.

I agree with this definition completely as a recently married person. I also think that people get engaged far too often based on the length of their relationship, and NOT on where they are in their own development. I got married in my late 20s, when we had already faced being dead broke together, living with the inlaws (before they were my inlaws), and had done things like taxes, moving, starting a business, and facing family emergencies together several times over.

What most people fail to understand is that a PreNup doe NOT protect you from the future, only what assets you have now. You can specify your Inheritence, but it in no way means the court will uphold the prenup.

OP, I'm guessing you know she's a bitch or deals with difficulty in a shitty way, to make you try to protect yourself. Is she really ready to be your life partner? By asking, you're saying you accept her, as she is, today, forever.

>>17727195
Its not a risk if you never have to work a day in your life because you married and divorced someone rich. Nothing about that is a risk.

>>17727200
I guarantee OP is not that rich.

>>17727209
Doesn't matter, you argue for risk when there is none if you can walk away with more than you started by marrying someone with more than you. That's not a risk. The current marriage laws exist because women didn't have the opportunity to work before. That doesn't exist anymore and you should get a dann job and stop trying to gain entitlement to someone else's money.

>>17727200
The reality of most people getting married is that both the husband and wife must work in order to cover their life expenses. If they want to have kids, it obviously falls on the wife, in most situations to stop her career ,(some careers have more leeway than others, the stay at home dad is becoming more viable). If you have to rely on 1 income to cover a family of 3, but for some reason your husband just wants out, you're looking at someone who is hardly employable, or, if they are employable, now has to pay outrageous daycare fees to work to provide for the child.

Marriage is mostly built around the Family Unit, not just 2 people. I literally don't know any stay at home moms around my age. That luxury passed with the baby boomers. If you are in the higher tax brackets, and you're dating someone who you think is with you for money, that falls on you.

You don't have to propose.
You don't have to get married.

Most people in these situations, this isn't their first rodeo and they have the lawyers to dissaude the financially greedy wife. You commonly read about rich guys getting their wealth jacked, but seldom the opposite where low-middle income dads skip dodge and leave their family penniless. The law can take MUCH longer than people think to persecute someone who leaves the state.

Divorce is expensive, so if you think your girlfriend is a cunt, don't fucking marry her. Live with her for 10 years before you decide if you want to second guess yourself.

>>17727220
Why SHOULDN'T you walk away with more than you started if you spent years of your life in this? Wasting your entire fucking life away not have more than you started with if you ever get divorced IS the risk.

>>17727223
Especially on 4chan, you'll find the images/first hand accounts of women being greedy cunts in divorce easily, but you'll ONLY hear about shitty/absentee dads via stories from their kids who watched and lived through the family struggle.

>>17727223
There's something called child support. Any prenup seen at detrimental to the child is thrown out. Your argument us moot.
Choosing to live a lifestyle that's non employable and having that lifestyle supported by your spouse in case of divorce us not a risk. You only have to gain. You don't even have to be a stay at home wife anymore. It's like early retirement. There's not a single risk there.

>>17727231
I made a pretty long post in response to this stupidity. But I decided to just reply with 4/10.

>>17727240
The average child support payment is $430. That's not enough to cover rent in a 2br/ utilites and groceries.

Alimony is based on BOTH parties income. This is the point you guys are missing with the other dude. If you ask that your wife stay at home to raise 2 kids and after 13 years decide to leave, there's no way she can find a job that covers the familys needs. It's a MUTUAL RISK. If you're not willing to take it, don't propose.

You can appeal to lower payments and adjust visitation/custody but you never hear those stories here. The guys who talk about divorce and custody battle are going to neglect to share the times the decided not to show up to court, the times they didn't pay their child support, and that's before the relationship part like ignoring your kid's life because you don't want to have see the wife.

This works both ways for both genders.
So if you don't want to take on the risk......

>>17727265
On average child support us made by couples who are poor and were never married. It's like you've never looked into this before.
There's no risk in leaving with more than you walked in with. So acting this ignorant.

>>17727282
>On average child support us made by couples who are poor and were never married
Source

But honestly, why would you even bring up child support in a marriage/divorce thread if you deemed it irrelevant after the fact?

>>17727300
I didn't mention children. I said any prenup that's detrimental to a child is thrown out. You can't use children to argue against a prenup as you are trying

I wouldn't marry anyone I am not capable of leaving everything for her. Including family assets. Isn't family assets what you would be doing with her?
Be a man and at least consider signing something to alienate yourself from the family assets.

>>17725702
Piece of advice. If you do go with a prenuptial make sure she has her own, separate legal council. It'll get thrown out otherwise.

>>17727265

This. It's not a hard concept to get.

>>17727345
what the hell is this