320,342 posts
320,342 posts
795 upvotes
by nbrnay on /r/TheRedPill
21 September 2014 10:59 AM UTC
Reddit View
| Title | Millionaire spends his life donating to charity and helping his wife battle cancer. She beats it and divorces him because he's spent all his money. |
|---|---|
| Author | nbrnay |
| Upvotes | 795 |
| Date | 21 September 2014 10:59 AM UTC (5 years ago) |
| Subreddit | TheRedPill |
| Link | https://theredarchive.com/post/21512 |
| Original Link | https://old.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/2h0y7i/millionaire_spends_his_life_donating_to_charity/ |
© TheRedArchive 2020. All rights reserved.
"I'm sick of bloody charity". Classy broad.
Actually, I would side with her as far as the article goes. You can be Bill Gates, and give, give, give until your fortune runs dry (he doesn't) and the world would cry out for more. And it always will. A charity will suck you faster and drier than most women could dream of and move on when nothing's left just the same. This guy is suffering from nice guy syndrome, just not for a woman. Gotta know when to be selfish and self-interested and say no.
This looks like a long term marriage, perhaps they married when young. Did she want to go back to living like they were 20 years old? Would you when your 70? Most people would want to kick back and relax. And when you survive cancer, that just takes a lot out of you, so that it doubles that.
I see old people buying canned dog food at the local grocery when I personally know they don't have pets. That's not a way to end up. Cancer often reoccurs and they sound like one health scare away from the poor house, which at their age, it's probable. Statistically, he'll die sooner than her too. He could have given out 70%, and bequethed the rest at their death and been better off.
Lastly, "Men cannot go backwards sexually , women cannot go backwards in lifestyle." http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3dGhsRsHXP8
It says they have been married for thirty years. Since he's now in his 70s, he must have married her in his 40s. It doesn't say how old she is, but she's at least in her 60s, if not older. So, she would have been in her 30s or 40s when they married. He was her beta bux. Was. :)
Exactly, even if he was doing the majority of the monetary earning, she was still contributing to the marriage/family by raising the kids and such (she probably did have her own job too, at various stages, since they didn't start rich), she's put in 20 years of work too and the social contract of marriage is that women sacrifice their own earning potential in order to raise the kids based on the assumption that there husband will make enough for the both of them. If my partner suddenly gave away everything we'd worked for I'd be very angry too. I really can't blame her.
Well said. She punished him for his stupidity.
Nice Guy thinks Nobility Points are somehow valuable. The only thing he'll get is some ass-kissing from other Nice Guys, more charities begging for more, and the interest of gold-diggers who smell a chump carelessly tossing away his resources.
Nice Guy feels he will be judged negatively by women for being selfish. It's the opposite. A woman is attracted to the apex predator who'll stop at nothing. His selfishness allows her to pretend she's not. Then she'll feign innocence and steal the silverware when his walls finally come crashing down.
They guy is 70. At that age, you are more concerned about your legacy. How you'll be remembered. So I can see you spending all your wealth on a good cause being a reasonable course of action. After all, you want to go out satisfied you made a positive impact on the world.
Of course, his wife felt a bit differently...
If I had to take a guess those were his thoughts exactly.
I hardly think the guy has anything to worry about in terms of income. It's been proven many times that millionaires who have lost a substantial amount of wealth have gained it back in a short amount of time. I'm sure what ever means he used to gain that fortune is will working behind the scenes.
When it comes to nobility points I agree some guys do have the female mindset. The need to look good in the public eye, but something tells me this guy isn't the type.
Firstly he's in his seventies, I highly doubt this man is looking for pussy points. Secondly he has lived the cancer experience, he knows the cost and he knows 98% of people don't have the funds ( $18,000+) to sustain proper treatment. Many cancer patients are driven to bankruptcy and I'm sure he's heard and seen the horror stories.
From what I've seen from looking him up he is doing just fine and his charity is growing at a fast rate. As for the ex wife she faded into mediocrity as far as I can tell.
They're in the UK, NHS covers the cost of cancer treatment. That said, $18,000 for the US seems incredibly cheap for any serious cancer treatment.
not everything in life is about getting laid. Giving back to others is certainly one of the most rewarding things a person to can do.
edit: grammar
You give back what you can without screwing yourself.
Charity is something you spend a chunk of your entertainment budget on not something you sell your house and move into a smaller one to do.
Maybe for you, not this guy. If he didn't feel good about what he was doing he would've stopped long ago. Everyone's different, just because you don't think it's a good idea doesn't mean other people will. This guy did what he wanted to do and I'm sure he'll look back and be extremely happy with his life. Personally I'd do it differently, but if this guys wired to be happy with these decisions then so be it, good for him. We need people like him in the world, not everyone can be selfish.
Who was talking about getting laid here? I'm talking about respect for resources. The point of getting good at Game isn't to have Pimp Mode take over your life. By getting good, you can find better woman with less effort. You conserve your resources and can focus on building up more instead of endlessly chasing tail.
Charity is a good thing. But a man must remain a soldier of profit to afford sustainable charity. I do not admire any guy who blatantly disrespects his resources, whether it be blowing it at the casino or handing it all over to charity. Thinking that this ex-millionaire is more heroic and noble for doing the latter is the form of BluePill rationalization that screws a man over. It's an exploitable weakness.
I agree with you, although this guy is 70. I'm sure he's at a point in his life where he's satisfied with what he's done and achieved in his life. Sure, his retirement would've been better if he had the millions, but we really don't know that. I'm sure he's made tons of friendships based off his charity work, friendships that he'll cherish for the rest of his life. Maybe in his mind the aid that he has given to people in need, as well as meeting other like minded charitable people far outweighs the money he could be spending now. He was a millionaire... Not many people can say that in their lives, and even less can say they turned around and gave it all to charity. Not saying he made the right decision, but he made the decisions himself. If he wasn't going to be happy about that decision he would not have made it.
You make it seem like he was giving charitably for pussy. I'm not sure if you've ever tried it, but it can be really rewarding on its own.
No, I'm saying HE is a charitable pussy.
Once they sucked that guy dry, the agency happily leveraged his story to lure other wealthy chumps into the same scenario. Once you have substantial resources, every gold-digger and charity wants a piece of the pie.
Edit: The rich dude acted much like a Beta Orbiter, giving his devotion and all his resources away for free. Every Beta thinks he's the noble guy on a hero's quest to win his fair maiden's heart. He deeply believes he's doing the right thing. Each "noble" act feeds into the storyline, gives him another emotional boost and reinforces his strategy.
It's all fucking illusions gents. There is no
spoonnobility.Edit 2: Charities know how to play on your heartstrings. This dude was seduced. They have some of the smoothest talking people you've ever met - people who know how to massage an ego and gently milk out funds. The guy went full retard and they happily took everything.
Learn to look at things with a cold eye. Not easy for a Beta heart to do. Most women are plenty cold, they'll just pretend to be warm. Rarely do you hear them tell it straight (and reveal their ruthlessness) the way this guy's wife did.
I checked out this guy's story in other articles and it seems you're right. Unfortunately, this sub seems to absorbed some part of the demographic of reddit's bleeding heart of college liberals who have yet to work a day in their life and wouldn't give a pack of top ramen to a homeless man they passed (but upvote every charity link here as if it makes a difference). These people just don't get it.
I say the woman divorced him so she would end up with something, while something was still left. Maybe not the most noble of intentions, but after a lifetime, even as a housewife, you expect to have built up something. He made fun of her buying a "big car", a Ford Focus, compared to a Ford Fiesta. Focus is still an entry level POS, which indicates where this guy's mind is at.
Especially if you wake up one morning, and find out you're married to some Charles Dickins character that "saw the light" and is intent on dragging you into poverty with him. He comes off as a Time Ho for the entire world.
Unless you know something I don't I think you're reading way too much into this story. The charity he gave his house too was HIS. Hard to be seduced by yourself...
And again, you're assigning intentions and motivations to his giving that you don't have evidence to assert. It is possible that he wanted to and enjoyed giving the money away without caring about what his wife or others thought about it.
Again, not everyone values possessions and money the same. The happiest people I ever met lived in a mud hut, had one pair of tattered clothes, and were perpetually starving. The stuff you own ends up owning you. You're shoving your personal paradigm into this guys actions.
[permanently deleted]
I know in the USA, at least, there are various USDA grades of meat/steak. Prime, which often goes to restaurants and the like. Then Choice and Select, which are on Supermarket meat aisle.
The rest (depending on age of animal, etc) go Standard, Commercial, Utility, Cutter, and Canner. They're usually not the cut meats, but some of these grades will be used to make hot dogs, ground beef, and I imagine Canner goes into dog food. Maybe I'm wrong, I just can't imagine them using anything approaching a higher grade.
But in any case, eating processed meat is usually a bad idea long term. If I couldn't afford decent meat, I'd just head for the whole eggs and seperate the the yellow out.
Since when do pets shop for their own food?
What country do you live in where the standards for pet food are higher than for human food?
Unlikely in this case, seeing as he founded it, it's his charity, and he's in charge.
Yeah, I agree with her too. At that age, after having cancer, you are essentially both getting close to death. You don't want headaches, you want comfort. Its really not the time to intentionally change to a harder lifestyle.
It really makes no sense to give all of your property and money away before you die. There will always be people in need, and they'll be around after you die.
Bill Gates literally saved lives donating a metric shit ton of condoms to Africa. Will they eventually need more condoms? Of course. Does that change the fact that they help prevent the spread of AIDs? absolutely not.
You're being a dick. Charity, when doled out wisely, is vital to the world.
When you have plenty, I believe it makes you - and the world - better.
Those who earned their money will be particularly good at giving that same money effectively and getting the highest return for society.
This said:
1 - take care of yours truly and set up several fail-safe egg-nests around the world. This includes setting things up for direct descendents and their own progeny (blood only). Because fuck it, if you fail 1 of your own children, helping 1000 000 strangers doesn't make up for it.
2 - take good care of family and friends. Because if I can help strangers, I'll help close people 1st.
3 - set up self-supporting charities that are light on administrative weight, high on effect. Targeted to getting people in useful employment, family, help people who deserve it get off poverty. Research for sickness and improvement of practical environment science would also be good causes.
Screw you bleeding hearts, this means no $$ for those who won't shift for themselves.
What a terrible troll that woman was. And she made absolutely no sense.
So how is divorcing him going to give extra security? He already gave all his money away.
And there is the crux. She wanted the security without putting in any effort.
I have nothing but respect for the husband. We need more people like him in the world. And less women like his ex-wife.
I admit a tad amount of schadenfreude in this one. She's old, fat, unattractive, and she thinks she's gonna leave him and magically find another millionaire who can give her a mansion? Oh life, sometimes you funny.
Exactly. He can build himself back up. She can only look for another dumb, rich sap.
She still must be crazy for Disney movies because she thinks she is a princess
This is what I hate hate hate about Disney. Women are taught to be princesses and people are taught to "be that special person that you are".
Don't be who you are.
Be who other people want you to be. Be cool, be fit, be successful. Learn to dress nicely. If you don't, society will judge the fuck out of you and you'll always be playing second fiddle to those who are able to be cool, be fit, be successful and dress nicely.
But fat shaming! Positive body image! Empathy for other's lifestyle choices!
I've learned a ton about the sexual marketplace from TRP, but for some reason it always seems that pigs like her are able to find some beta sap to marry. Maybe it's because they just lower their standards until they succeed. There will always be a man somewhere who is desperate enough to get his dick wet and stupid enough to think she'll stay the same sweet woman he was "always waiting for".
It's possible, but just going with statistics about women remarrying after 40, it doesn't look good for her.
I wonder if this is partially because, after being alive for 40+ years, many men can see straight through the bullshit they would normally buy into during their twenties.
A man of his calibre still has assets. He gave all his "savings" away. He still has his business, financial investments, and future income potential. She divorced him to legally divert 50% of his future income into her bank account. This ensures that she gets the money and not other cancer patients.
By divorcing him she forfeits any claim to his estate after he dies. She does not care about this because she won't outlive him. She's more concerned with living the good life right now.
You have look for the 'weasel words' aka 'woman code' aka Power Talk in these situations.
"I wanted money. I did not marry this man to be poor. If I had married another rich guy instead of this dumbass I would still be rich and 'secure'."
"The 'charity' stole money from me and my children. In addition he is spending all 'his time' working on the charity instead of making more money. Where is more money going to come from if all his hard work is given away for free? We all (me and my freeloading kids) are sick of it."
Oh god this shit sounded like an Onion article
You underestimate the power of the rationalization hamster. It has the power to make women believe that they cutting their wrists will help them live longer.
Briffaults Law in a nutshell.
Maybe this was his way of sticking it to his miserable wife without having to give her any of his money. After 30 years of dealing with her worst side he probably realized he'd rather not be married to her any longer. So, he donates everything realizing she will divorce him, he will look like a wonderful humanitarian and she will look like a greedy slag.
[permanently deleted]
I'd probably choose to cut her loose the way he did too if I knew she was only interested in the money and not me. She doesn't deserve any of his money if she can't appreciate all he did for her.
[permanently deleted]
"have", not "had"?!
are you crazy?
[permanently deleted]
Well look at it this way he's decreasing his income, lowering his assets, prepping her for a more modest lifestyle.
In many ways it looks like the guy is preparing for retirement or he could have been playing the long game and prepping for a divorce in order to reduce his costs in alimony. I'll assume he was prepping for retirement though because most men with a sick wife don't think about divorce. Perhaps his charitable donations were towards cancer charities as a way to help find a cure or something and now that she's better she dont need him to be charitable anymore.
[permanently deleted]
It would be a really hilarious. But I suspect my assessment is the more likely situation. Don't attribute to malice what you can attribute to stupidity or something...
I think the guy was just gearing down to get ready for retirement and help his wife and other people in her situation. It just so turns out that he ended up benefiting from it. I doubt he'll be living in a cardboard box or anything and I doubt he plans on making a huge amount more than what he's making now so whatever alimony he is forced to pay will probably stay the same through retirement until he or she dies.
He should have broken up with her the moment she got cancer, realistically. Or just never married her.
Logically, yes, morally... No. It really depends on what type of person you are and if you actually have been in that situation. Personally I think if that happened to my wife I could never leave her as long as the marriage was going steady prior, but if I was forced into that situation I might make a completely different decision, who knows.
I don't really abide by morals
subtle troll, just noticed the name.
Not trolling. What do you mean by the name?
Well the man clearly has more moral fiber than this entire subreddit combined.
This is hilarious and possibly brilliant. He avoids giving her half his shit but he obviously has a good business mind and connections so can likely build himself up again if he so chooses, without the deadweight.
the salary that company directors get in UK fort running charities is in the £100,000 range so im sure he will be fine.
40% income tax bracket at that income plus half your shit to your ex works out to 30K a year.
I could live a very comfortable life on 30k a year. You could mortgage a small but decent suburban home and buy a nice enough car.
Good luck getting a mortgage at that age!
But yeah, in general it's a perfectly comfortable income
Bullshit. Do you even live here?
30k is nothing. I'm a young grad, I make more than that and I can't even afford my own place.
You sound like you need to pay /r/frugal a visit.
Also, we were talking about 30k net income. Not gross income.
He still has to pay money to his wife after they are divorced?
[permanently deleted]
Ha thats to do with hmrc and marriage laws. So yah hes screwed but not gutted.
"I wanted security for us and our family".
Gentlemen, if you are still debating on whether or not TRP learnings are accurate, this line should send you screeching over the edge of the cliff. Women do not love like men. They either love (1) How you make them feel (alpha) or (2) What you can do for them (beta). They love opportunistically and pragmatically. That's life, deal with it and act appropriately (aka don't get married in the West).
This can't be repeated enough times in this sub.
How do you accept this truth and not become bitter to women
Are you bitter at cats because they love their owners opportunistically and pragmatically? No you don't, because that would be ridiculous. A cat is a cat, we all know what to expect; either you're cool with that and have/want one as a pet or you don't think they are worth your time.
If you're bitter and angry at women over this knowledge, it's only because you're still going through the stages of loss. You're in the anger stage. You just need to reach acceptance. Accept that women are what they are, it's not their fault. Evolution has created a creature best designed to birth human children and ensure their survival to adulthood. There is nothing there worth hating, you're just upset that what you have been told your entire life is that women aren't this way and that they are instead something else.
This is the point of TRP. It's not to shit on women, it's to help deprogram men from the bullshit lies women, feminism, and modern media give us every day about women in order to help us better live our lives and understand our relationship with women in this world as men. This knowledge empowers you to then intelligently decide for yourself if LTR's are what you want out of life, if chasing women is worth your time. It's a bitter pill to swallow, but in the end you will be better off if you can simply reach acceptance.
Its not so much that were bitter at women, were bitter that as a man theres no sane, humane mating option available to you. Your doomed to a life of loneliness or a life with a psychopath who forces you to be looking over your shoulder the rest of your life. You cant ever drop your guard around her for a minute. What a shit way of life that is. Good luck accepting that, its horse shit and will be until the day you die. Whether you accept it or not.
Again, it's the anger stage. You been raised with expectations as to what life should be like and what women should be like. You still want what you've been told you can have in your blue pill days, but you are slowly waking up and realizing that this has all been a lie and you're angry, REALLY fucking angry; you're angry that you can't have the fantasy as it was promised to you. I get it, I really do.
However, once you accept that the illusion is just that, an illusion, you will stop being angry; you will realize that those desires for a suitable mating option are fantasies, like unicorns, and that they don't exist. Are you still mad that your parents lied to you about Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny? No, because you accepted the reality that they are pure fantasy, being angry that they don't exist is a wasted effort.
Realise that's what most people do, man or woman?
[permanently deleted]
I dont think the average man is anywhere near as selfish.
[permanently deleted]
Yes, please, help. I surrender red pill I don't want a wife anymore I just wanna fuck girls and get head rubs from one of them sometimes.
Do girls in the east love differently?
There are more social and legal pressures on them to keep their marriages intact. Also, they are raised to be feminine and please their man. So yes, it's a very different feel.
True, but having money and security is as important there as anywhere. A man not being able to provide adequately for his wife and family will find himself divorced just as easily in most Eastern countries nowadays.
I just have to ask, if they dont get married in the west, where are they supposed to get married?
Asia, Russia, India, Eastern Europe. Anywhere that traditional values are protected by societal shaming and by law.
North Korea, China, Saudi Arabia etc, gotchya
Divorce is still 50 - 50 in China. edit: For assets after marriage. But one good thing is prior to marriage you get to keep your shit.
If you're still debating whether TRP is full of shit this is pretty clear indication of how inaccurate it is. TRP constantly goes on about how women can't be rationale and make logical decisions as well as men and that's why men must be the captains in the relationship, but now it's apparently a key truth of TRP that woman only think opprtunistically and pragmatically.
If your worldview simply adapts any possible scenario set out for it then it's likely you're an extremist. As usual the common core seems to be "women bad, men good" but it's not about hating women! It's just that men possess traits which happen to be positive things and the traits that women have are purely by coincidence negative things.
"Think" is very different from "act", and that's what TRP is all about. Women act on feels, men act on thinks. That's why we should lead, because logic wins over feels 999/1000.
Except that this woman is acting on that pragmatism?
Never mind that men don't act rationally more than women at all, in fact the opposite, we're much more likely to behave recklessly whether it is driving dangerously, committing suicide or committing crimes.
So physics, logic, mathematics, rhetoric, philosophy, astronomy, civilization, law, and debate were created by the logical women?
Guy, you are really doing a disgrace not only to your gender, but factual history in general. Girls acting pragmatically on their instincts are very different from someone who think rationally and acts on logical decisions. This is why they talk about wanting nice guys, then fuck assholes like us. That's them acting on a genetically pragmatic decision (good genes from a non-committal alpha) that is logically unsound (instead of a nice beta that will stick around and raise the child).
I didn't say men were incapable of rationale thought, rather they are more inclined to acting irrationally than women. Yess, because women have been educated just as long as men, no women today contribute to physics maths, astronomy or law.
The fact that so many of your TRPers are full of bitterness and hatred towards women is a clear indication of their inability to separate their feelings from logic and rational thought. Instead of just using TRP as a framework for understanding human relationships they're consumed by it and irrationally attribute all fault to the other party in their relationships and generalize that to all women.
If you step back and consider that both men and women can think and act rationally at different times depending on the situation and that acting based on feelings instead of logic is part of the human condition rather than the female condition then TRP is actually more internally consistent.
Directing bitterness and hate towards women simply for playing the game the way society has taught them is a fools errand, something for lonely basement dwellers to fixate on in an attempt to explain their loneliness and ineptitude.
Any real man should respect a women for choosing a better partner when the option arises (assuming they do it tactfully, i.e. break up with the previous first) just as you would choose a better looking broad when you can.
The 2nd picture tells the whole story.
Just look at her "sitting" there like a sack of potatoes. Her apologetically smiling husband standing in the back.
Looking at this picture creeps me out.
Now imagine the outcry if the same man leaves his cancerous wife. All would hate the dude, he would never be allowed to run for political office etc.
Proof positive of feminine primacy! Even on this board they are blaming the man....
Newt Gingrich was pummeled over this very thing in the '90s.
This stood out to me in particular:
'I didn't intend to have to beat cancer and then spend the rest of my life living in a house like this and doing everything for everyone else.'
I hope the bitch gets cancer again...
The title of this thread is a little misleading , she left him for his stupidity. Sure he was doing a good deed, but he gave up everything to charity to the point that they would be entering their "golden" years broke. If anything it sounds like he is addicted to charity. Yes that can be a bad thing if it affects the standard of living they had over the last 30 years. In the article it mentions he bought a house which was for charity. As a married couple that long one would think she would also be included in big purchasing decisions like that. So if he was going out giving their money away I think it changes things a little bit.
Who knows if they would have to spend their golden years broke? Maye he knew he could make the money back.
Or maybe he put away enough to live on but it wasn't enough for the lifestyle she wanted.
Could be. But either way, that's still fucked up.
I hope she just dies soon..... at least then we can use the cancer treatments that she would have gotten on someone else who might actually deserve it.
What also irks me are some of the comments under the article. Situations like this make me sick to the back teeth yet there are people that are willing to defend her actions. Sometimes I wonder what is worse - the act, or the person who adamantly believes that the act was justifiable.
If my husband bought a house without telling me or discussing it with me I would be furious though.
[permanently deleted]
That's kind of fucked that no one else thinks that's fucked....
They do think it's fucked, but they also know that ultimately we look out for ourselves. I'd be more willing to bet people won't shame her for it because they would likely do the same in her situation.
When you get married don't you swear an oath/vow to stay 'for richer or poorer'?
She probably had them alternate lines...so she said for richer...and he said for poorer.
Then she had a nice little laugh to herself when he said it.
Example #23482913 of why you DO NOT GET MARRIED.
There's another one today of DO NOT PROPOSE
It starts:
I'm not going to link as it's not worth reading unless you need more hamster today, and do you really need that?
Now that you've given us the punch line, you really need to give us the rest of the story.
okay, you were warned (such as "road we traveled was one of love, laughter, pain, tears and, most importantly, growth"), here it is:
When did I know my marriage was over? There were two key moments.
The first was the moment I accepted the engagement ring. When I say that, people usually ask why I went through with the vows if I knew better. The answer is, I couldn't find a good enough reason not to.
I, like most females, grew up intending to get married and have children. I dreamed of wedded bliss with my high school sweetheart, but that didn't work out. There were a few other loves along the way, and then in my mid-20s I found myself building a life with my now-ex. We lived together. We had friends together. We had a dog together. We were both responsible with our money; we were good planners and dreamers.
After we'd lived together for two years, he proposed. As I sat in our home and stared at the ring, my mind was aflutter with thoughts.
Something doesn't feel quite right.
Is this what I want?
This is what I have, and it's been good enough until now.
We've already built a life together.
This is what people do. It's the next logical step.
I have security with him.
There's really no reason not to say "yes."
I said "yes," and the planning commenced. I learned quickly that I didn't want to deal with the stress, the details and the cost of a standard celebration. A destination wedding seemed to suit our preferences much better than a traditional ceremony, so we booked a trip out of state and planned to return as husband and wife.
When people asked questions, I made jokes:
"I don't need my dad to walk me down the aisle. This is a mistake I can make by myself."
"We're saving our money for the divorce."
At the time, I wasn't entirely conscious of how serious I was. I knew something wasn't right, but I did love my fiancé. I wanted to get married. The date was set, the plans were made and I was excited. But then, who wouldn't be? We were being showered with positive attention and admiration from everyone we knew.
The honeymoon ended quickly. A few months after the vows, it was painfully apparent that we weren't meeting each other's expectations. We had different ideas about the kind of roles we'd play, when we should have children and how we'd raise them. He was disappointed and I felt suffocated. Yet, we trudged on and tried to make the best of it.
One night, in the middle of a particularly dark period for us, my husband came home and suggested we separate. At first, I was angry. How could he make up his mind about something so serious without talking to me about it? I stomped out of the room, down the hall and into our office.
My husband followed me and stood in the doorway. "Isn't this what you want?" He asked. "Don't you hate me?"
What followed was the second moment that I knew my marriage was over.
There in the dim glow of a computer screen, I felt as if a light bulb turned on and a huge weight was lifted from my shoulders. Who are we kidding? We aren't happy. Why should we continue to hurt ourselves by keeping up this façade?
I nodded. "I do hate you," I told him. What else could I say? It was the truth.
My brutally honest confession opened a new door for us. From that point, we were able to accept reality and let go of our marital expectations. We could finally stop trying, stop pretending and stop fighting. It was a relief.
We parted as friends and years later, we're still friendly. Although I knew the marriage was over before it began, I'm glad it didn't end there. The road we traveled was one of love, laughter, pain, tears and, most importantly, growth. We brought each other to that second moment, where we could face our situation honestly and as a team... a team on a mission to end our marriage.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/divorced-moms/the-marital-moments-that-_b_5827064.html
You're all fucking lying pricks if you don't admit that your partner giving away all of your life savings and assets to a fucking charity would be a major issue.
Edit: You're all missing the point. Nobody's disputing that it was technically his money to do whatever he wanted with. The point is that he could have done that without undermining his family's security and peace of mind, and creating a stressful situation unnecessarily. That's unacceptable, and she has every right to divorce over it. This isn't a redpill issue...the guy needs therapy. Or at the very least, lessons in finance. He could've contributed to charity in a more sustainable manner if he'd not just thrown all his assets at it.
The part in dispute in your statement is 'your life savings'. Are they really hers?
What if she was the one who had worked for all of your life savings, and what if she was giving it away to benefit patients of a disease you had suffered from?
I think the key issue is that men are expected to provide money that both partners will benefit from, while women are not. Most people would call the man a huge asshole if the genders were reversed in this story, I think.
This guy is still bringing in money...ya you're not living the big extensive lifestyle you were before but it's not like they won't be able to eat because of it.
He lives above the charity's headquarters in a council estate. That's not just a 'change'
Archive.today link: https://archive.today/tHA5Y
Take this entire article with a huge handful of salt. The Daily Mail is the worst of British journalism
The Daily Mail is the worst of
Britishjournalism.cough cough
I dunno, it's cold as fuck but I almost see where she's coming from. She got hitched to a rich guy to live the rich life, apparently. It also seems as though he was okay with that.
I'd be bummed out to marry a girl who kept herself fit and ate well at the start, then just decided to let it all go a few years into the marriage.
From what it looks like here, dude just decided to flip the script on the dynamic of the marriage, and the overall understanding that we're gonna live the rich life. As admirable a cause as the money went to, I'd probably be like wtf too.
You mean exactly what most women do after they get married?
She hates the way he gives his money away but I bet shes going to want him to give away his money to her as alimony afterwards too
This is so fucking cold, I can't even begin to comprehend....
What an awful human being she is! She admits it so lightly too! She openly states she hates helping others and resents him for being such a good person!
My brain just froze.
I really don't think she is getting a divorce to find another dude.
If she isn't happy with his actions why should she stay with him? The same way you wouldn't stay with someone who's actions you didn't like.
It says he gave it away (£16million) ~after~ she beat cancer.
.. that he bought without telling her. He has mental issues and I wouldn't trust my credit history to him either.
You still have to pay for the cancer drugs after its all said and done. Pretty sure she was covered during the treatment.
He bought a flat, because he didn't want to live in a mansion, he was being modest. Considering he didn't just magically lose all of his money in a spurt of random events, I'd say he has better credit than everyone on this thread. Mental issues? nah, he had "living with a cunt" issues.
The article was pretty clear that he wasn't spending his £16 million on ~her~ treatment.
He bought a house and his spouse had to hear about it 2nd hand. He is leaving $0 to his children. The only cunt here is him.
He's paying alimony so not all of his money is gone, secondly cancer treatment ain't free, and she didn't have a job...he was paying for it.
Lastly, he doesn't believe in inherited wealth, and I can agree with that, the less this society needs, is more rich, pompous 1 percenters who could give a shit about everyone else...or did you not get that from the article?
Not mentioned in the article.
In the UK everyone is covered by NHS.
They may have opted for private insurance, the article doesn't say.
The article is clear that the £16 million from selling his hotel went did not go towards her treatment -- "In 2009, he sold the hotel and used all the proceeds to fund a fleet of cars ferrying rural patients to hospital – as part of his charity, Daft As A Brush."
Not leaving millions to your kids - sure. Not leaving them $10? After you sold your £16 million hotel to provide a free taxi service?
Something's up here. I'll bet there's a lot more to the story than the Daily Mail covers. Ordinarily I'm all for hating on a trifling bitch too but I don't think this is a clear cut case.
And besides, if the husband had come home to find his wife hellbent on giving away all their money, we'd advocate for divorce in a heartbeat. So, her claims may have some merit.
But again, we don't know what's going on here. This might be another case like the McDonald's hot coffee case, where the initial narrative is silly and enraging until you actually read about what happened. (Long story short, woman sued McDs for hot coffee that burned her - actually it was third degree burns which is really horrible, McD's gave her a runaround and refused to pay even her medical bills, and she had to go to court for justice - entirely reasonable even though you look at the story first and go, 'no way'.)
This is a weird case and I suspect not all the facts are in, so I don't think it's wise to speculate on something so ambiguous.
It's his money he can do whatever the fuck he wants with it.
Exactly! He made the money before her so she shouldn't be entitled. I hope there was a pre signed.
They were putting unnecessarily, extremely hot coffee in cups, because they promised that the coffee would still be warm when you arrive home with it.
I agree. Especially when you start to consider that she's gone from living in a mansion with 10 acres, to living in a rented flat next to a council estate because her husband gave away all of their money...can't really blame her for leaving when you think about it.
Being angry at woman's behavior is the same as being angry at a sorting algorithm actually sorting an array of integers.
It's a program fulfilling its purpose.
Perhaps you should be angry at the lack of societal chains that used to curb the evolutionary baggage instilled into female genes that programs this kind of behavior?
Or perhaps you should be happy realizing that male charity, self-sacrifice and white-knighting are themselves evolutionary baggage designed to optimize tribal survival at the expense of the disposable sex, and are as such against your personal interests. As is clearly evident from this case.
Well said. This is the hard part for a guy to see because his primitive brain rewards his self-sacrifice with positive emotions. It feels right, so it must be right.
I guess you could say men make decisions based on feelz too, then?
Breast cancer is one of the easiest types of cancer to treat and it gets so much attention/funding. According to personal experience, they are the whiniest patients as well.
That's true, but it's still cancer - come on man.
The man is generous but... he altered his life style so much that I could possibly sympathize with the woman.
It did mention they moved into a rented home. To go from a stable, and secure life/retirement to a life in which you could possibly be homeless in your twilight years due to irresponsible money management from your spouse is grounds for divorce in my book.
I can't judge her comment "I'm sick of bloody charity", as i do not know how much charity she has been part of. Maybe she is sick from doing charity 5 days a week, 10 hours a day, even though she isn't that type of person? Maybe she doesn't have the energy to work so much at her age after a possible life time of hard work. I know I don't do too much charity, and it wouldn't surprise me to learn she does more for other people than anyone else here criticizing her for being "sick of charity work".
I don't know all the details. I do not know how much money they have left or how they live day to day. But if I were married, and suddenly I had to sell the house I bought because we can no longer afford it due to money management by my wife, I think I would justify a divorce. Regardless of the reasons behind her mismanagement of the money.
Is she in a stable lifestyle now? Is there anything left for her to take in the divorce?
Why would you stay with someone after they potentially screwed over the rest of your life? Just because you guess it may be more stable to stay with them? No, if someone completely ruined me financially I would also leave them.
In my opinion he made the money its kinda his say how he wants to spend it. Maybe he should have given her a portion of the estate and left it to her to manage that portion. Thats whats basically going to happen post divorce anyway. A marriage should be about more than the economics. Im guessing that after the economics was removed from the relationship, there wasnt much left. In that case, its not really a marriage anyway.
There is a special place in hell for her.
My worse nightmare. I know all women are not like this, but I fear getting stuck with one like this.
Well, she didnt love him. End of story
Those comments make me sick.
To be fair she likely had no say in his donating the money. She probably married him on the basis of his wealth in the first place. Sure he contributed greatly to saving her life, but in a woman's mind, this is a given anyway. I'm not surprised or angry, just a woman being a woman. He was a fool to give it all away. He could have given away 50-70% and live the rest of his life in security and comfort.
Just further proof that nice guys finish last. Even if they are married. Either dont be a nice guy, or stay single.
I would say she did the sensible thing divorcing him, before they both ended up in the poor house.
Sure it was cold of her to do that, but her husband is nuts in donating away their financial security.
Wow. What a piece of trash.
Whatever, he's better off without that dead weight.
Just when you think you've seen it all.
I was going to leave a comment in the comment section on that site, then I realised it's the daily mail. Think I'll give that one a miss.
I see a man who spent a massive amount of his money on a personal addiction, that caused his marriage to be destroyed, and apparently nobody in his immediate family apparently supports what he was doing. The only reason he isn't laughed out the room is because he wasn't addicted to some type of drug or a commonly accepted bad habit. Him treating her of cancer does not make either of them immune to imminent health risks, nor does it remove the fact that his financial decisions directly impact her life. Just because he is being selfless in regards to the rest of the planet, does not mean he is not being selfish to his wife and family. He's literally making decisions, that affect his family, with little to no regard of their stance on the matter. Maybe he still has a million left, so they can still enjoy a comfortable life endgame, but it doesn't change what is going on.
While it is hyper-optimistic that this was some strategic play on his part to burn all his money so she can't get to it in after the divorce, the reality is that the money burning caused the divorce.
That wife is very, very unlucky that her husband's addiction is charity, for the obvious observation that people want to sympathize with the addict because of its, on the surface, positive nature.
How do you know he's addicted? That's just a story you've created about him in your mind.
It's clear that his addiction to charity had higher value than his family, including his three children.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1327146/Brian-Burnie-sells-16m-estate-cancer-charity-Daft-As-A-Brush.html
It is not uncommon for addicts to give up their and their families belongings to support their habit.
It also isn't uncommon for addicts to justify their irrational, self-destructive behavior.
Sounds like a similar story of spouses who have addicts in their families, cleaning up their messes.
He's not just doing something that he likes, he's involving his family, which is not only voicing concern, but is being forced to participate, just like any other household with an addict in it. That's the problem with addicts, it is not just them that's affected, and the addict usually doesn't care about how their actions are affecting others.
There is nothing reasonable about a married man selling a large sum of his and his family's belongings, dragging them into his habit at their expense to their protest. Addicts do find such behavior reasonable though, and regularly do that.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Addiction
The end of a 30 year marriage because of his habit, with a possibility of alimony payments can be considered an adverse consequence. Most would consider going from a mansion to an apartment an adverse consequence. This wasn't some turn of luck, this is irrational behavior. At least it's not crack though, I'd assume you wouldn't give someone a pat on the back for that addiction.
BluePill princess-worshiping is the same sort of addiction (and RedPill the cure).
What surprises me is that this guy was successful in business. That means he had the drive to accumulate wealth. He got turned somehow. Could have been a stroke. But more likely he had narcissistic tendencies and fell under the charms of those in the charity. They probably romanced the hell out of this guy, making him fall in love with his idealistic self.
I would assume that he simply got old and old people mental conditions are taking effect. Who's to say that he is able to reacquire his wealth, let alone maintain it, with this nonsense.
Got old. Got religious about medical care. Lost his frosty... I'm sure glad my father stayed RP to the end.
Why the hell would you link DailyMail? It's shit.
Proof that this particular story is bullshit or shut the fuck up.
Take your own advice, dumbass.
Onus is on you.
hahaha
Reason #12449120482481 NOT to get married: Because she doesn't love you, she loves the way you make her feel.
Or how your assets make her feel.
STOP LINKING TO THE DAILY MAIL, IT DOESN'T COUNT
Daily mail? Nope. Fuck that not clicking. Go fuck yourself but thank you for linking inside and summarizing!!
What is people's problem with DM? All you have is the equivalent of an ad hominem attack.
They get caught faking stories ALL THE DAMN TIME. They literally make shit up. They make up completly fake stories with no sources and no evidence and then mix the fakes into their real news coverage. These fakes are often outrage bait. Charlie Brooker did a fine debunking of them. Do you remember the "Weekly World News" and how they would have real news stories and then throw in a Bigfoot story and a few alien abductions? Well replace Bigfoot with Diana and Alien abductions with ghosts and you've got the Daily mail. They literally and unambiguously make up completely fake "outrage bait" stories then salt them into their real coverage. The only way to know if this particular story is true would be to get it from another source.
Here are the first three fakes I found in google
http://www.imediaethics.org/News/2432/Pcc_censures_uk_daily_mail_for_fabricated_amanda_knox_story_.php
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/page/276056_The_Daily_Fail_Caught_in_Compl
http://www.businessinsider.com/george-clooney-slams-completely-fabricated-daily-mail-story-about-his-impeding-nuptials-2014-7
I can google "NYT fakes" and come up with Jayson Blair. Daily Mail isn't scholarly but, on the whole, accurate enough and they say what other papers won't.
No you can't, just did that and got nothing like the results you claim, if you weren't 100% lying you'd have known you have to enter -www.nytimes.com or you get almost nothing but results FROM the times rather than about the times. I can find plenty of MISTAKES from other papers like NYT, and their published retractions. But the Daily Mail isn't making mistakes (it's former editor and chief) have admitted many times to outright total and complete intentional fabrications. They don't make little factual errors and transpositions, they don't accidentally pick up a fake story from a satire site overseas without vetting it (as many other papers do). They sit down in a story meeting, and brainstorm ideas for imaginary news stories, that is a part of their work day. Then they publish them, and delete them after a few weeks. They have been getting caught doing it for decades now. They get caught all the time, you're either not from the UK or not paying attention. The NYT doesn't TRY to publish fake stories and when they do it's an accident. The DM *intentionally fakes stories. That's the point you have missed. When most papers publish a rare incorrect article that is a rare mistake and they often fire the author. But DM has an in house production team that fabricate stories from the ground up intentionally. There are people working at DM right now whose only job is making up ridiculous bullshit. Tell me, how many UFO stories does NYT currently have on their website? How many bigfoot stories? Go search DM, they have plenty of Bigfoot stories, Ghost stories and UFO stories, because they are not a real newspaper they are an entrainment publication. Like how WWE isn't really wrestling, it's sports entertainment. They are not meant to be taken seriously.
Feel free to go prove to yourself that /u/luvBeer is lying. Unless you add a -www.nytimes.com or -www.dailymail.co.uk -clooney string to your search you DON'T find ANY fakes beyond one story repeated over and over, then you just get pages and pages of results FROM www.dailymail.co.uk rather than stories ABOUT the Daily Mail's long standing official policy of making shit up whenever they feel it would be entertaining to do so. They are the WWE of newspapers, for them putting on a good show is more important than being realistic. It's sad that /u/luvbeer couldn't even be bothered to try his pretend google search, I mean it would've taken him all of 3 seconds.
I'm not making a logical proof here. I'm saying clickbait is clickbait and I refuse to click. DM should be banned and archive.today made mandatory. Whatever. Bar that, all I'm saying is that I'm not clicking. Do whatever the fuck you want, man. I ain't tellin' you what to do.
And I'm not cross examining you, but it seems like this motif occurs repeatedly on reddit when CNN is just as clickbaity with their non-news stories about African women overcoming the patriarchy etc etc.
You're goddamn right it is!
So if you must, use archaive.today as stated in the posting guidelines for TRP. Thanks, man. Great point.
You're a prime example of a fake overcompensating alpha
I'm here to get pussy. This must be why I can't find any pussy here on TRP. I distinctly recall being told I would be getting pussy here on TRP and you're telling me the reason I'm not finding it is because I'm too alpha.
Yeah, I'm the one whose head is up his own ass here, lmao.
not too alpha, you're overcompensating, meaning you're actually just a needy whiny bitch
The Daily Mail makes Fox News seems rational, truthful and unbiased. DM is ok if you want to keep up with celebrity gossip, nothing else.
NO, they also suck at celebrity gossip. The problem with the Daily Mail is they have an admitted and long standing policy of making things up. completly, just bald faced lying. They admit it, they get caught doing it all the time. They do it again and again. NOTHING they publish can ever be trusted because of this policy. Even if they only faked 1/10 stories, how could you ever know which of the stories was the fake without checking other sources... and they are particularly bad at celebrity gossip, telephone psychics give more accurate accounts than DM stories.
Edit Bonus
Please give me an article from the current DM homepage which is irrational or untruthful.
ROFL!
You sure picked a bad day to say that... they've got their frontpage plastered with another one of their Diana classics. their only source? Is the author of the latest in the thousands of "totally made up stories about me and Diana" novellas released every year. Oh that same author, of the book quoted as the ONLY source for this article? IS ALSO THE AUTHOR OF THE ARTICLE. So he's using, as a source to support his claims, a book he himself wrote, in which he quotes himself as the source. I don't even know where to start with that level circular bullshittery.
Remember back when the "Weekly World News" and the "National Enquirer" used to run Elvis sightings and Elvis stories and "So and So says in new tell all book that the king... sex with Joan Rivers"? Or "Micheal Landon's last words..." or "So and so's fateful last words to Micheal Landon" (we saw that one come back with Paul Walker) Same deal in Daily mail speak;
Elvis == Diana
Aliens == Muslim Asylum Seekers want to rape your beheaded children
Bigfoot == Pedophiles around every corner
as a bonus here are the first three totally outrageous complete fabrications that google popped up.
http://www.imediaethics.org/News/2432/Pcc_censures_uk_daily_mail_for_fabricated_amanda_knox_story_.php
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/page/276056_The_Daily_Fail_Caught_in_Compl
http://www.businessinsider.com/george-clooney-slams-completely-fabricated-daily-mail-story-about-his-impeding-nuptials-2014-7
edit 2 ::
Special UFO bonus bullshit they fucking made up
More UFO bollocks
ROFL? The Diana story says in the headline that it's some guy's story. Re: googling "Daily Mail fabrication" I can do the same for the New York Times and up pops Jayson Blair-surely just as damning as anything the Daily Mail's supposed exaggerations.
I personally don't subscribe to the whole 'Let's hate the DM' bandwagon. I think most people choose to hate it because other people hate it, plus it makes them feel like they are being critical and therefore make themselves feel intelligent. I accept it has its flaws but don't all news sources? I wouldn't blindly subscribe to the BBC, The Telegraph or the Daily Mail. Telling me to go fuck myself isn't really a constructive comment, simply don't read it, downvote, whatever and move on instead of ensuring this internet stranger knows that our opinions clash.
They get caught making up stories every day. They invent totally 100% fake stories. They get outted on it constantly. I've been embarrassed after sending a link to a DM story only to find out it was completely utterly faked. They FAKE stories. Let me lay that out for you again, THERE IS NO WAY TO TELL WHICH ARE THE REAL STORIES AND WHICH ARE THE ONES THEY INVENTED FROM THIN AIR. It's not that we hate them, it's that we've learned over time that they salt their "real" news coverage with complete fabrications. Out of 10 Daily Mail stories you can bet at least one is something they decided to create out of thin air with no evidence whatsoever. If this article isn't fake, the only way to know that is to get it from another source. THAT'S why you shouldn't use DM, not hate, because they are notorious for adding "bigfoot" stories randomly throughout their publications.
Here are the first three fakes I found in google
http://www.imediaethics.org/News/2432/Pcc_censures_uk_daily_mail_for_fabricated_amanda_knox_story_.php
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/page/276056_The_Daily_Fail_Caught_in_Compl
http://www.businessinsider.com/george-clooney-slams-completely-fabricated-daily-mail-story-about-his-impeding-nuptials-2014-7
Check out Charlie Brooker's brutal debunking of their bullshit over that piece of styrofoam they claimed was a child's skull...
Fuck you. Use archive.today because DM is clickbait.
Just because I'm an asshole doesn't mean my constructive criticism isn't constructive. You focus on dumb shit and ignore what is of value.
I ignore what is of no value and throw dumb shit at dumb asses polluting the sub. I even took the time to compliment what you did right.
It's not constructive criticism though is it, its your opinion on a particular news source. 'Use this source because I prefer it and you are wrong' is definitely not constructive. Use the downvote button if you feel that it's 'polluting the sub', that's what it is there for.
Its not a source, jackass. Read the fuckin' posting guidelines before you starting banging ignorance off your keyboard next time.
Just stop linking to the daily mail, it's not hard.
The jokes on her, there is no such thing as divorce. When you make vows in front of God that's permanent. God does not care what some piece of paper from the government says.
well he did lose status by going broker lol. I expect a vulture to do what a vulture does. Or in the words of Chris Brown "these hoes aint loyal"
The comment section in a nut shell.
I watched the whole thing....I got the point within the first 10 seconds but yet inexplicably watched the following 3 minutes
Don't get married, don't give money to charity.
Thank you shitty people for making this world so awful.
Idk what simp millionaire she will find, maybe she all ready has a plan B millionaire bf? In any case, his decisions to curb their lifestyles' opulence may have been somewhat irrational... You can always leave your fortune to the charity when you die, not before ya silly goose!
Ughhhh. If I had a wife that looked that that I'd be rooting things went the other way.
And here is the BP example demonstrating: "What's yours is ours. What's mine is mine." From the comments:
Maybe JCas would prefer if he left her to live with the breast cancer to which she was accustomed? After all "his money was THEIR money", and spending it on her treatment robbed him of a lot of cash.
And here we are trying to NOT be like this guy in order to get Women.
How sad is it that TRP exists based on so many prior social failures.
I think we all may be missing something important here: If you give your funds away to a charity that you control, can those assets be seized in a divorce?
If not.....well played old man, well played.
He should have let that cunt die.
The entitlement is strong with this one.
She is everything that is wrong with this planet.
Wow.
What a cold-hearted bitch.
He helps all kinds of people, and helps his wife beat cancer, and THIS is how she repays him?
That is SICKENING.
Lesson Learned fellas;
Prenup - make her sign it.
God some people are fucking stupid. Money cant buy people that truly care for you.
Another moron with an eroded sense of morality who cares about no one but themselves. What else is new?
Never has taking the red pill been more expensive than it was for this guy :(
The good news is, he did what he wanted to do, and got rid of a worthless bitch in the process.
This guy is the smartest person I've seen. Let's look at his options:
Option A: Divorce his wife when he figures out she has cancer, lives with half his money and is vilified to no end.
Option B: give tons of money to a good cause, help lots of people, and get sucked dry. So divorced as well, living with very little money, and a guy who's probably the role model for thousands.
It'd be a tough choice for me.
He should have let the whore die.
Sister's roommate cheated on her BB doctor friend after she has told him that she didn't love him. He also knows that she got double-teamed by someone she loves and his friend, and he took her on a dream vacation to spain anyway. Then yesterday I heard he just bought her a mercedes. At least it's in his name. She's approaching the wall ~30, and I can't help but feel that if society didn't tell him to be retarded about women he'd just be getting his dick wet on 20 year olds rather than having oneitis on a whore. She is a slut in all respects. I feel I could at least get a blowjob during any time of privacy with her and she has offered. This is the other side of the coin on that BB's unicorn.
Being a woman's beta boy is like throwing money to a charity. She's probably jealous of the competition.
Being a woman's beta boy is like throwing money to a charity. She's probably jealous of the competition.
He should have let her die.
Daily mail is a fake publication
How do people not get this? It's like an American tabloid but with Diana instead of Bigfoot. They just make shit up, they get caught all the damn time. We need to get a good list of stories they've faked and start posting it into Daily Mail threads until people clue in THE DAILY MAIL MAKES UP MANY OF IT'S OUTRAGE STORIES, TOTALLY INVENTS THEM FROM THIN AIR. Like Bigfoots and Elvis Sightings and UFO abductions, they just use British versions of those tropes instead.
Here are the first three fakes I found in google
http://www.imediaethics.org/News/2432/Pcc_censures_uk_daily_mail_for_fabricated_amanda_knox_story_.php
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/page/276056_The_Daily_Fail_Caught_in_Compl
http://www.businessinsider.com/george-clooney-slams-completely-fabricated-daily-mail-story-about-his-impeding-nuptials-2014-7
[permanently deleted]
The error in the title of this thread is that it was "his" money.