TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

  • Subreddits

      Popular

    • /r/askTRP
    • /r/TheRedPill
    • /r/MarriedRedPill
    • /r/MensRights
    • /r/MGTOW
    • /r/PurplePillDebate
    • /r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen

      • Other

    • /r/AllPillDebate
    • /r/AlreadyRed
    • /r/altTRP
    • /r/AntiFeminists
    • /r/askFDS
    • /r/askMRP
    • /r/askRPC
    • /r/becomeaman
    • /r/BlackPillScience
    • /r/Chadfish
    • /r/Divorce_Men
    • /r/EverydayMisandry
    • /r/ExRedPill
    • /r/FemaleDatingStrategy
    • /r/FeminismStopsWhen
    • /r/GEOTRP
    • /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
    • /r/MalePsychology
    • /r/Male_Studies
    • /r/MenSupportMen
    • /r/MGTOW2
    • /r/MuslimRedPill
    • /r/newTRP
    • /r/PussyPass
    • /r/PussyPassDenied
    • /r/RedPillBooks
    • /r/RedPillParenting
    • /r/RedPillWives
    • /r/RedPillWomen
    • /r/RedPillWorkplace
    • /r/RPChristians
    • /r/seduction
    • /r/ThankTRP
    • /r/TheRedPillStories
    • /r/trpGAME
    • /r/TRPOffTopic
    • /r/TrueBlackPillMGTOW
    • /r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre
  • Blogs

      Popular

    • Dalrock
    • Heartiste
    • Illimitable Men
    • Return of Kings
    • Rian Stone
    • The Rational Male
    • Woujo

      • Other

    • Artful Prudence
    • A Voice for Men
    • Alpha Game
    • Black Label Logic
    • Caleb Jones
    • Captain Capitalism
    • Corporate Machiavelli
    • Days of Game
    • Deep Strength
    • Dicipres
    • Donal Graeme
    • Female Misogynist
    • Free Northerner
    • Gaming My Wife
    • Good Looking Loser
    • Hawaiian Libertarian
    • In Mala Fide
    • KillToParty
    • Kill Your Inner Loser
    • Krauser PUA
    • LaidNYC
    • Married Man Sex Life
    • NO MA'AM
    • Omega Virgin Revolt
    • Pook's Mill
    • Random Xpat Rantings
    • Red Pill Theory
    • Red Pill Wifery
    • RedPillDad
    • RedPillDoctor
    • Seasons of Tumult and Discord
    • Sigma Frame
    • The Feminine Woman
    • The Futurist
    • The Masculine Principle
    • The Modern Man
    • The New Modern Man
    • The Obsidian Files
    • The Power Moves
    • The Private Man
    • The Red Pill Room
    • The Red Quest
    • The Rules Revisited
    • The Spearhead
    • Troy Francis
    • Wintery Knight
    • Young Man Red Pill
  • Books
  • Dictionary
  • @TRParchive
  • Please help TheRedArchive stay alive

Woman tries to pull one over on her husband and take half of his money. She leaves her old ipad with him so he know's what's up and strikes first. Remember folks, always have an asset protection plan in place.

neighborhood_man
July 29, 2014
345 upvotes
/r/TheRedPill
Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB
Share
Share Tweet Reddit Email
Post Information
Title Woman tries to pull one over on her husband and take half of his money. She leaves her old ipad with him so he know's what's up and strikes first. Remember folks, always have an asset protection plan in place.
Author

neighborhood_man
Upvotes 345
Comments 179
Date July 29, 2014 5:15 PM UTC
(11 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/TheRedPill
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/2c24kg/woman_tries_to_pull_one_over_on_her_husband_and/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/TheRedPill/woman-tries-to-pull-one-over-on-her-husband-and.228929
https://theredarchive.com/post/228929
Red Pill terms in post
the red pill
Top posts by neighborhood_man

Guys wife cheats on him, blames him, and wants a divorce. He begs her to come back. She does, and now she is asking detailed questions about his finances.

52 upvotes
August 19, 2014
/r/TheRedPill

Guy makes payments on car in wife's name. Wife won't ever let him drive it without chaperoning him.

47 upvotes
June 10, 2014
/r/TheRedPill

Does anyone know a woman who is NOT insane?

33 upvotes
July 27, 2014
/r/TheRedPill

Meet the woman who charges Betas $60 per hour to cuddle

18 upvotes
July 24, 2014
/r/TheRedPill

10 Things I Want My Daughters To Know About Marriage (from a Beta)

14 upvotes
July 14, 2014
/r/TheRedPill

Invited multiple chicks to same event, how do I play this?

10 upvotes
February 13, 2015
/r/askTRP

Looks and Labor: Do Attractive People Work More?

6 upvotes
August 9, 2014
/r/TheRedPill

How to play Beach Trip with two chicks

2 upvotes
March 5, 2015
/r/askTRP

Comments

[–][deleted] 11 years ago (49 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]TRP VanguardArchwinger 124 points125 points126 points 11 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

Stupid of the husband to gloat like that. Yes it seems ironclad, but why give her information to build a counter suit? I'm sure it was satisfying but it was horrible operational security.

Yeah. A better move would have been to file for divorce like he did, but pretend it's out of the blue. Tell her he met someone else younger and prettier, wish her the best but that he needs to do what makes him happy, and act surprised when he finds out that he gets to keep the house and his trust money, proclaiming that now he can buy his new woman that necklace she wants.

He'd probably have gotten out of his marriage, and gotten to keep fucking his ex-wife.

[–][deleted] 96 points97 points98 points 11 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

That way he wouldn't have compromised the ipad intel and could have continued to anticipate any and every dirty move she might try during the divorce.

[–][deleted] 11 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]TRP Vanguard: "Dark Triad Expert"IllimitableMan 72 points73 points74 points 11 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

He is butthurt over the fact they are divorcing and not thinking clearly, compromising his interests to his own detriment. This self-sabotage caused by falling into her frame rather than maintaining his own. Radio silence, stealth surveillance and a strong show of "I don't give a fuck" would have sufficed.

[–][deleted] 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]TRP Vanguard: "Dark Triad Expert"IllimitableMan 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

http://illimitablemen.com/2013/11/17/understanding-the-dark-triad/

[–][deleted] 21 points22 points23 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Yeah it's just foolish, childish gloating at a perceived stroke of tactical genius that is essentially a blind stroke of luck.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Exactly, feel good for the husband but he seems like an idiot for setting himself up like that

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Yeah, it's almost painful to read him fucking himself over like that.

[–]Hughtub 23 points24 points25 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Very true. Always play the long game. Never show all your cards. Glory is in winning, not in gloating.

[–]palch12 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

For people like the guy in the post, it doesn't matter if he won, it only matters if people know he did.

[–]2comment 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Tell her he met someone else younger and prettier,

That's still a form of gloating I don't think is necessary and wouldn 't trust the courts to not use against him. Just say "I tried, but it's not working." and leave it at thatuntil after the settlement is final.

People who can't keep their mouths shut are often their own worst enemy.

[–]Endorsed Contributorzyk0s 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The only socially acceptable way to end any romantic relationship is to say that you "fell out of love". Anything else, and you put yourself at risk socially, and sometimes I'm sure legally too.

[–]TheIronViking 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I agree with this. The "war" isn't over until it's over, and this is taking miraculous intel and showing your hand WAY too soon.

[–]neopet 21 points22 points23 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

What a rookie move. Never show your hand.

[–]neighborhood_man[S] 11 points12 points13 points 11 years ago (22 children) | Copy Link

Yes although the legal minds seem to think that what he did wasn't illegal.

[–][deleted] 11 years ago (21 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]trpalternate 9 points10 points11 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I have a female friend in Texas who was getting divorced and she did almost exactly what the husband in the post did. In this case, her ex left her a computer that they had both shared, and his passwords were stored on it. It also had Outlook set to sync his emails automatically. Her lawyers said that because he left the computer there, accessing any information left on that computer was legal. The guy and his lawyers never knew what hit them.

I agree, though, that giving up the source of your intel is extremely stupid. He was probably pissed off and wanted to throw the divorce back in her face, but all he did was ensure that she will change her passwords.

[–][deleted] 11 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]iseetrolledpeople 7 points8 points9 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You should really check The 50 Laws of Power. 48 LoP was a good read but 50's one is more useful in this shitty world.

[+]evenmoretiredoflibs -12 points-11 points-10 points 11 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

Somebody get this guy a copy of common sense.

The 48 laws of power aren't the 48 laws of the united states - so what the fuck are you talking about?

In response to bitbucket - he has a point. She can show a lawyer the letter from him and the lawyer can try and figure out exactly when these things were actually entered into the trust. When any financial decisions were made. He can place those in context to their agreed separation, and this might have an effect on how the husband thought the assets would be divided accordingly.

For example, a judge might be like "well, it looks like you didn't actually enter the house into the trust until after divorce was mentioned, so for the purposes of this divorce, the house isn't owned by the trust".

Do me or bitbucket thinks that makes the most sense or is the most likely going to happen? No. Does that mean it's still entirely possible - yes.

[–][deleted] 11 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[+]evenmoretiredoflibs -17 points-16 points-15 points 11 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

Yes, and I'm entirely aware they don't apply to the court system in America.

[–][deleted] 11 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Endorsed ContributorUEMcGill 6 points7 points8 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Yeah, they would've found the trust regardless of him telling her. If it was before the marriage, it would be in good standing so no consequence.

He did royally fuck up by showing his complete hand. Hell, he could have had a master case built with his lawyer before they ever sat down for a depo. Now he just ensured that her lawyer would subpoena him to death and go through a war of attrition. He wouldn't stop a good attorney from doing proper discovery, but now he'll ensure it.

[+]evenmoretiredoflibs -11 points-10 points-9 points 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Yes - which is entirely irrelevant now that he's getting divorced. Thanks for joining the conversation.

[–]theredpillager 5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

It's not irrelevant to this conversation, and you've come out of that discussion looking like a royal twat. Chill out, internet tough guy.

[–][deleted] 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Nicolay77 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

You seem very confused by the title of the book.

Imagine it was called: "48 common sense principles to beat your opponents". It's a more precise title regarding the contents of the book.

Would you still keep confusing the book with actual laws?

Your mistake is like confusing a rulebook of football for the officials, with a strategy book for the players. The officials need to know the rules only. The players need to know the rules (laws) and the strategies to win (principles).

The book is about the latter (principles).

And the main idea of the whole discussion is that applying strategies to win is NOT agains the rules.

In other words, applying the 48 principles of the book is NOT against the law, doesn't break any rule, and it can help someone to win.

[–]evenmoretiredoflibs -4 points-3 points-2 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Would you still keep confusing the book with actual laws?

No, I'm familiar with the book. It's on my bookshelf. I would never confuse them as laws which is why I found it pretty amusing that someone would bring it up in a discussion that essentially amounts to legal strategy. But then again I'm studying for the LSAT so maaaaybe that's why I think it's a stupid thing to base any legal thing on.

[–]still_very_alive -2 points-1 points0 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

The legal system is not, despite the best efforts of liberals, entirely devoid of common sense. Yes, maybe from a legal perspective, whether nor not he gloats doesn't matter, but since the judge gets a certain amount of leeway in ruling, and the court will likely be biased against the man, why take the chance?

[–]TRP VanguardJP_Whoregan 16 points17 points18 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Don't think the gloating will matter too much. A premarital asset is still a premarital asset, and this is an asset that could never have become joint to begin with. A trust is a legal entity just like a person, and the trust is not a liable party in a divorce lawsuit.

[–][deleted] 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]frugal_masturbater 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah, the gloating in itself is not the problem. The indirect effect can be very strong, as in, her having proof that he knowingly misled her, abused her etc.

That guy is not smart.

[–]THE_Aft_io9_Giz 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

this is not true in all states.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Well, it fits the depiction of him - remember if not for the dumb luck of finding the iPad, he was about to get half his family's trust fund plundered. He sort of bumbled his way into this one.

[–]1Goomich 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

remember if not for the dumb luck of finding the iPad

They knda ding, when message arrives.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Dumb luck as in, if she had maybe 5% more brainpower, she wouldn't have left it with him.

[–]redpillshadow 77 points78 points79 points 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

What a shit stain this woman is.

Remember "Taking time" "A break" or some bullshit always means break up. No matter what she does in that time. It doesn't benefit you. Either she fucks someone else. Or she is trying to fuck you over. In terms of the linked thread stealing money from you. And yes moving to another state while lying to your husband for 6 months to get half of his trust is stealing.

[–]neighborhood_man[S] 42 points43 points44 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Notice later down in the thread she blames the consequences of her own stupidity on the laws not being up to date. So far hasn't answered when questioned on that.

[–]TRP VanguardJP_Whoregan 50 points51 points52 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

In one breath she admits it's an "old iPad2" that they "both used" (read: joint/marital asset), and in the next breath, accuses him of stealing something she left in their marital household.

The hamster can be mythical at times.

[–]1cover20 14 points15 points16 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

She just assumes that, as the female, she gets to screw him over in every way. She's even mad that she doesn't win a big slice of the house that he owned before the marriage.

He owned that house free and clear. That's the only way he could put it into a trust, I think.

I enjoy seeing people like that suffer. :)

[–]batfish55 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Agree.

See: proof of entitlement.

[–]doveenigma13 10 points11 points12 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah I like how she dropped that bomb at the end. She knew the whole time she was trying to get his families money.

[–]boney_hoo_hoo 76 points77 points78 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

I read that with a huge smile! "Wahwah my husband protected his trust fund when I tried to secretly divorce him." I hope that guy rolls in his money while fucking her sister.

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points9 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

She's still angry despite being likely to get a sweet deal. What an utter cunt.

[–]ThePedanticCynic 28 points29 points30 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Well, he gets to keep his house and his whole trust fund. Why do you think someone like her married him?

No kids? They couldn't have been married too long. Also talked to a lawyer the second she got back to Indiana? She knew what she was doing. There needs to be some national gold digger registry for people like that.

[–]The_Floating_Dick 9 points10 points11 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

"Hi, my name is Tiffany and I'm legally obliged to inform you that I'm a registered divorce rape offender"

[–][deleted] 11 years ago (91 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]TRP VanguardJP_Whoregan 57 points58 points59 points 11 years ago (82 children) | Copy Link

Trust + no mortgage but them paying rent? Fucking genius.

So if I ever make the deluded mistake of marrying, at least remember to sell my house to my parents and start paying them rent on it before the marriage. Duly noted, and fucking brilliant.

[–]neighborhood_man[S] 134 points135 points136 points 11 years ago (31 children) | Copy Link

I'm posting this to you and will copy and paste-post this to others. I am in the asset protection industry. There is not a single fool-proof plan in the world, it is all a matter of degrees.

That being said, what you want to do is put your assets in a trust. They are no longer yours. So, how do you maintain control? The more you maintain control the more likely a judge will order you to turn them over, under the theory that you have control.

So really you don't want to own assets in the country. If you have a house in the US don't pay off the mortgage, instead move the assets overseas through an offshore trust in a country that doesn't give a shit what a US court says.

I am planning on writing a TRP asset protection essay in a few weeks

[–]chancethebanker 58 points59 points60 points 11 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

I am planning on writing a TRP asset protection essay in a few weeks

Please do.

[–]neighborhood_man[S] 34 points35 points36 points 11 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

will do. Am trying to figure out how to do it without revealing my identity.

[–]ModMachiavellianRed[M] 38 points39 points40 points 11 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

I can post it on your behalf if that helps.

[–]neighborhood_man[S] 21 points22 points23 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

OK we will do that maybe, thanks

[–]Endorsed ContributorRedBigMan 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

My advice...

Give general pragmatic advise that would make a discussion with your lawyer productive.

For example the idea of a trust that holds the family household is a good one to talk to with your lawyer about. Likewise having off-shore separate assets which will not be brought into the marriage assets. Likewise also consider where you live and where you get married as well... jurisdictions and stuff that are favorable to your divorce strategy is where you should ideally stay.

[–]Dopebear 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Just make an alt/throwaway account. You can have as many as you like on reddit and lots of people have them.

[–]1whatsazipper 5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Trusting someone named 'MachiavellianRed'. What could possibly go wrong.

;)

[–]ModMachiavellianRed 6 points7 points8 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Context is everything.

[–]1whatsazipper 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Minor amusement. I'll carry on.

[–]Extract 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

RemindMe! 3 weeks "check on asset protection essay"

[–]umilmi81 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

move the assets overseas through an offshore trust in a country that doesn't give a shit what a US court says.

If the country doesn't give a shit about what a US court says, doesn't that put your assets at risk? Can't they just sell them to someone and say "fuck you, we don't care about US law"?

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

They still have their own laws and courts.

[–]ThePedanticCynic 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

/r/MensRights would also be interested in this.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Sadly I doubt they could get over the butthurt / judgment of where the advice was coming from.

[–]ThePedanticCynic 7 points8 points9 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

I don't think that's true.

I've read quite a lot, and i think MensRights fight for equality in the courtroom, specifically family law. TheRedPill seems to avoid the fight altogether, but are just as socially active with tactics.

You're not on the same road, but those roads intersect at points.

[–]still_very_alive 5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

TRP and MRA believe in the same thing. We just came to different conclusions about what to do.

[–]ThePedanticCynic 5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

TRP and MRA believe in the same thing.

That's an extremely complicated statement that, in the end, i think i understand: women dominate in the courtroom.

TRP generally avoid the courts by not having children/wives at all (among other things), whereas MensRights fight to ensure they'll have a reasonable chance to get the children (in a divorce), and not pay alimony to a 4 year wife (true story).

I recently found out that some states allow divorcing women to raid trust funds set up by the parents of their husbands. Fucking. Absurd.

[–]srsh 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Thanks for the explanation. MRA is another sub I'm going to subscribe to.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Also please not make it too US specific if you can.

[–]1whatsazipper 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You've piqued my interested as well. Any asset protection information would be well received.

[–][deleted] 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]neighborhood_man[S] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I wrote ten pages so far. Will finish this week.

[–]Tsilent_Tsunami 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I am in the asset protection industry.

Used to be into asset protection, but more in the offshore corporation/nominee officers arena. I'd be very interested to see what's new. Can you reply to this when you've completed it? Would be very much appreciated.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Was not even aware you could do this.

Doing this.

[–]neighborhood_man[S] 12 points13 points14 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm posting this to you and will copy and paste-post this to others. I am in the asset protection industry. There is not a single fool-proof plan in the world, it is all a matter of degrees.

That being said, what you want to do is put your assets in a trust. They are no longer yours. So, how do you maintain control? The more you maintain control the more likely a judge will order you to turn them over, under the theory that you have control.

So really you don't want to own assets in the country. If you have a house in the US don't pay off the mortgage, instead move the assets overseas through an offshore trust in a country that doesn't give a shit what a US court says.

I am planning on writing a TRP asset protection essay in a few weeks

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago* (46 children) | Copy Link

Yup and obfuscate your assets. Get bit coins or gold or something.

[–][deleted] 13 points14 points15 points 11 years ago (42 children) | Copy Link

This doesn't work. The courts are very, very good at finding money. Outside of a secret stash of money that you somehow hid, probably illegally, from the IRS, you cannot do much to hide assets.

I used to be good friends with a bankruptcy/divorce attorney and we used to chuckle over people trying to hide assets.

[–]neighborhood_man[S] 16 points17 points18 points 11 years ago (39 children) | Copy Link

I'm posting this to you and will copy and paste-post this to others. I am in the asset protection industry. There is not a single fool-proof plan in the world, it is all a matter of degrees.

That being said, what you want to do is put your assets in a trust. They are no longer yours. So, how do you maintain control? The more you maintain control the more likely a judge will order you to turn them over, under the theory that you have control.

So really you don't want to own assets in the country. If you have a house in the US don't pay off the mortgage, instead move the assets overseas through an offshore trust in a country that doesn't give a shit what a US court says.

I am planning on writing a TRP asset protection essay in a few weeks.

[–]Olipyr 6 points7 points8 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I am planning on writing a TRP asset protection essay in a few weeks.

That would be great! I've been wondering what I can do.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Hokay, look forward to reading it.

Filler text so bot doesn't delete blah blah blah.

[–]DirtyNamesGetBlocked 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago* (35 children) | Copy Link

Please do. I'm planning a wedding (found TRP too late already into the planning stage) and I don't trust this woman after how vehemently she protested a prenup. I have substantial assets and she has substantial student dept. I do things by the books (as immoral or unethical as they seem) so I would love any guides you have on how to legally protect assets.

Edit: You guys think I'm not trying to get rid of it. I'm still trying to get over the fact that my fiance turned into bridezilla. I nearly broke my computer in rage today. We live apart btw. So don't worry, shes not in any harm. Once I cool down I'll tell her that its prenup or nonup.

[–][deleted] 42 points43 points44 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

It's not too late. Get out now. You don't trust her? What the hell are you doing marrying her????

[–][deleted] 9 points10 points11 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Love is deaf dumb and blind

[–]idiotKyle 31 points32 points33 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

What the fuck is wrong with you? Just press kill switch while you still have the chance.

Or do you enjoy playing Russian roulette with your assets and freedom at stake?

[–]1AreYouAware_ 26 points27 points28 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It is never too late. If you think it's painful to eject now, just wait until she gets unhaaaaaapy and ejects herself with your hard won assets.

You see this coming and you're still not going to dodge the bullet?

[–]redpillshadow 25 points26 points27 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I have substantial assets and she has substantial student dept.

She surely loves you deeply and in no way is already planning the divorce.

GET OUT NOW. Fuck the money you already burned in the planning stage. These are sunk costs. She is going to take way more later. And no prenup is going to save you. She'll claim she was under distress when she sign cause you threatened not to marry her unless she does and the feminist judge will throw it out.

[–]Paweler 17 points18 points19 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I'm planning a wedding (found TRP too late already into the planning stage)

and I don't trust this woman

And you still want to marry her? Wow

[–]1cover20 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Indeed. Anyone who can call their fiancee "this woman" should never never never marry her. Even if you're deeply in love and remain so for the first few years and first few kids, shit can go very wrong later. But if shit is not awesome now, GET OUT!!

[–]Geryon667 17 points18 points19 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Don't be stupid, eject. This will be the most expensive mistake you ever make.

[–]blarggggggggggg 17 points18 points19 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

If you have the slightest bit of doubt DO NO GET MARRIED

I wish I knew then what I know now - I wasted my 30s, the best years of my life, playing the chump to a manipulative women who refuses to work.

[–]Sleep-less 15 points16 points17 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

DO NOT MARRY HER. THAT IS ASSET PROTECTION.

Seriously dude, what the flying fuck.

[–]Sleep-less 12 points13 points14 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

DO NOT MARRY HER. THAT IS ASSET PROTECTION.

Seriously dude, what the flying fuck.

[–]HahahahaWaitWhat 11 points12 points13 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

What the fuck? Did I actually just read this?

You don't trust this woman, in fact you already suspect she wants a piece of your assets, and you're not married yet but you're still going ahead with the wedding?

WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU.

[–][deleted] 10 points11 points12 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Fucks wrong with you? You said you don't trust her but are still getting married? Pull the pin.

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

On what grounds does she protest? Perhaps you found the rp just in time. What is stopping you from calling it off?

[–]darkstout 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

By marrying you're entering into a legal business contract. She will be your equal partner. 50% of everything you make will be her's.

One tip: don't mix your assets with new money after you get married. Take what you have now and stash it away. Don't let her touch anything. Open brand new accounts. Depending on where you live, previous assets will remain yours (as long as you don't add more of "her" money to it).

[–]trpalternate 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You don't trust her and you're still wondering what you should do?

[–]1cover20 5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Just tell her nonup. You changed your mind.

That's what engagement is for. So each of you can determine if they're sure they really want to make this lifelong commitment.

People have even abandoned the partner on the altar before taking vows. That's better than taking vows you don't want, awful is it is.

For you, it's easy. It's not even wedding day. Say the engagement is off. Let her decide what to do with the ring. Don't let her anger trap you into a marriage you don't want. Once you get married she'll have a real claim on your assets. This is obviously very important to her.

It should therefore be even more important to you.

[–]bertstare10 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

from what I understand prenups really don't mean anything anymore and judges can/will ignore them/throw them out.

It'd be nothing short of a good idea to go speak to a lawyer and tell him your concerns. He can't repeat anything you tell him since attorney-client privilege and all.

[–]Tsilent_Tsunami 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I'm planning a wedding

I don't trust this woman

Should I lol or wtf?

[–]neighborhood_man[S] 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Yeah wait a couple of weeks until I can write my post

[–]1cover20 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

A couple of weeks? We are not stupid. I am married almost 20 years. Others have valuable informed perspectives too. You can tell us the root of what the problem or complication is in a few sentences.

Look dude, if you want to get married to her or feel you have to, go ahead and be stupid. We tried to warn you, I don't care any more because I think you are giving us crap. I am not going to wait two weeks to find out this mysterious thing that prevents you from doing what a real man can do: say no. And by then any complication will be worse and you will be two weeks closer to the date, you would have built yourself a better excuse because then people will have put down more deposits, made more travel plans, given more wedding gifts, etc. etc.

You don't need an excuse as far as I am concerned. I think you're being a moron, but it's a free country. Go for it and don't bother me with this again. Goodbye and good luck to both of you.

[–]Kalepsis 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Step 1: draft the prenup. Step 2: tell her if she doesn't sign it, the wedding is never going to happen. She has 48 hours to make up her mind, then you're going to a notary public to sign it. If she refuses, stop all wedding plans, get your deposits back, eat the cost of anything that is non-refundable. That is MUCH LESS EXPENSIVE than the divorce that she's going to throw at you a year after having a baby. Trust me on this.

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points9 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

prenups signed under duress get thrown out by judges. There has to be at least 6 months between prenup and the marriage.

He needs to call it off and tell her that who she became is not someone he can trust and therefore marry.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Get out. The prenup isn't covered if you do it so close to the actual marriage. The judge will throw it out.

Tell her how she has being acting is making you have serious doubts about marriage and that you're going to put the engagement on hold. Also tell her a prenup is non-negotiable.

[–]Endorsed ContributorRedBigMan 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I'm going to echo what others have said... GTFO ASAP!

Rejecting a prenup + substantial student debt (what did she take please dont say Womyn's Studies!). Remember when married her debt becomes your debt. There are plenty of stories of guys getting divorced and being stuck with their ex's student loans.

She's no unicorn, you can probably do better. I hope you dont have a kid or she's pregnant yet because she can still get a ton out of you via child support.

[–]DirtyNamesGetBlocked 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Its not womens studies its medical school.

[–]Endorsed ContributorRedBigMan 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Well at least she'll be making a ton of cash as a part time doctor.

[–]neighborhood_man[S] -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

It's complicated but I will write a post about it in the next few weeks. Stay tuned.

[–]Tqbfjotlds5 points 11 years ago [recovered] (2 children) | Copy Link

It doesn't have to be complicated. I know what it feels like to think you are obligated to a women for either the situation she is in, or for something that happened (having a baby). A woman will walk out on you, the first chance she gets.

You are not only signing away 50% of what you have, but in most cases 50% of what you will make in future.

Please think about this rationally. Walking away sounds worst than it is. A wedding is only a big party that has been planned. Do not marry, when you have a doubt.

[–]Tsilent_Tsunami -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

but in most cases 50% of what you will make in future.

Sorry, but I work for this corporation owned by a mysterious figure who pays me very, very little. I've asked myself them for a raise, but they've refused.

[–]bertstare10 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I am planning on writing a TRP asset protection essay in a few weeks.

please do and explain thoroughly...

[–]Endorsed ContributorRedBigMan 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Well it gets easy to hide assets if you do it over a long period of time. If you have to hide a quarter mil in a couple of weeks good luck.

If for example you buy a $100 gold coin a week for 25 years thats $130K you've managed to hide and that's not counting for inflation which gold tends to be good at keeping up with inflation.

Also as long as you pay taxes on your income the IRS does not give a fuck what you do with your money. Hence the above strategy would be a decent one. If you make cash hand over fist then your woman shouldn't notice $100 going into a black hole... ideally you'd not even have her know how much you are making.

[–]spitfire7rp 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'd be very interested in how they would find bitcoins if you weren't stupid enough to link the purchases to your bank account or just told on yourself.

[–]neighborhood_man[S] 5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm posting this to you and will copy and paste-post this to others. I am in the asset protection industry. There is not a single fool-proof plan in the world, it is all a matter of degrees.

That being said, what you want to do is put your assets in a trust. They are no longer yours. So, how do you maintain control? The more you maintain control the more likely a judge will order you to turn them over, under the theory that you have control.

So really you don't want to own assets in the country. If you have a house in the US don't pay off the mortgage, instead move the assets overseas through an offshore trust in a country that doesn't give a shit what a US court says.

I am planning on writing a TRP asset protection essay in a few weeks

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Obfuscating your assets with bitcoin sounds like the stupidest fucking idea ever. Not a personal shot at the above poster (maybe he just heard somehwere else it's a good idea), but I just can't wrap my head around the fact that somebody could consider this a good course of action. Has anyone out there actually done this successfully? Would love to see some sort of article about it, because it sounds like complete and utter horseshit.

[–]neighborhood_man[S] 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I know people with a lot of assets in BITCOINS, I think it is dumb but so far it is working out for them. What you need to do is settle a Trust outside the US and then invest in whatever you want around the world.

[–]1kick6 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Depends on where you live. In Texas if you own the house (even if there's a mortgage on it) prior to the marriage, its yours.

So basically, if you get married - even if you move into a larger house to support a family - NEVER sell, just rent, the house you had before hand. It will always be yours.

Also in Texas: if a woman has gainful employment and/or a degree...no alimony! A degree (even if she decides to be a homemaker) is proof that she COULD be employed, and doesn't need alimony.

BRB never leaving Texas.

[–]ButterMyBiscuit 30 points31 points32 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Some of the replies in the thread were great.

IANAL, but I'm curious how you wish the law worked, if it were updated tomorrow. Would have the law require him to avert his eyes from an iPad that you shared with him and left in the house?

Everyone saw right through her bullshit doublespeak. She wanted half the shit her husband had before he even met her, and she's pissed she's not getting it and now wants petty revenge in any way possible.

[–]neighborhood_man[S] 9 points10 points11 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Trust + no mortgage but them paying rent? Fucking genius.

Yes that is the way to do it (although my preferred way is not to have any assets in the US at all). However, there is a good chance that he is lying about the house being in the trust the whole time so she might still have a crack at the house. People with trusts try to fudge what is actually in them and when they went in all the time.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

This is the kind of thing that consistently has me scratching my head. Is it her shit-testing when she says she wants a break and is it him failing it for agreeing? There was a post YESTERDAY about how a girl said she wanted to move out and the guy said "ok, bye" and got a totally different result.

I'm just trying to understand what makes these situations different.

[–]nrjk 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

What remains a constant is the man's ability to take it or leave it (the relationship). Correct me if I'm wrong, but her reaction would qualify if it's a shit test or not. If she's serious, she'll leave. If not, then it's just another shit test.

One guy in a band I play with said "you've got to make them think you'll be better off if they leave you."

Moral of the story, always look out for yourself.

[–]drimadethistocomment 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It would seem like he didn't care. Obviously he had protections set in place all along. If he was looking at her messages, he had his questions. Maybe he just felt like letting it ride out. I'm sure she feels worse about it after going 5 months thinking her plan was working

[–]Burner1701 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It's a bit dodgey that he had her believing she was paying mortgage repayments on their house when in fact she was paying towards something she had zero legal claim to. Sounds like it was always a rubbish marriage if that was the level of honesty involved.

[–]evenmoretiredoflibs 21 points22 points23 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

IANAL, but I'm curious how you wish the law worked, if it were updated tomorrow. Would have the law require him to avert his eyes from an iPad that you shared with him and left in the house?

My favorite response. She's going into turbo-mode!

[–]xtr3m 10 points11 points12 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lfE94SwjT5E

[–]Hllblzr310 18 points19 points20 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

"I feel so violated"

Cool story, bro.

[–]Theophagist 14 points15 points16 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Seriously, how dare he protect his assets when she clearly wants them.

[–]1cover20 10 points11 points12 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Her claim to his assets is frustrated, and she feels "violated".

Maybe she can charge him with rape for not handing over his life's work to her because she has a vagina. You go girl!!!

[–]1 Endorsed Contributormordanus 16 points17 points18 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

So rare to hear a win like that. This is a great post man.

[–]1100110011001 9 points10 points11 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Indiana_Divorcee -1 Points 16:32:47, 29 July Ugh, thank you. I guess I made the mistake of leaving it, and the laws haven't caught up to what happens in real life.

Lol wow. Aww, we have us a victim here.

[–]B_Campbell 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

She doesn't seem to mind that the laws that would have allowed her to take half his stuff haven't caught up to real life.

[–]1100110011001 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Some points I got out of the Op were: 1. She has a job. 2. He owned the house before the marriage. 3. She has family she can live with.

So she isn't exactly on the street, she's getting by for 5 months just fine with her job and living with family. She also did not put the money down on the house and I'm willing to bet he made quite a bit more and paid more into the house monthly than she did. If it's anything like my previous arrangements with ex-wife and ex gfs that moved in, their tiny incoming from doing hair part time was just play money.

The fact that she feels entitled to half of his shit he obviously earned before she married him makes me sick. If she rents a house, does she expect the landlord to sell the house and give her half the equity when she leaves?

This guy is my hero, other than fucking up giving away the fact he could read her messages. It would have been valuable to still have that should there be some bumps in the divorce process.

[–]TRP VanguardJP_Whoregan 17 points18 points19 points 11 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

Ignorant question here:

If the marriage contract was executed in Pennsylvania, how is it possible for the wife to run to a neighboring state, i.e., Indiana, establish residence there, and then to file for a divorce settlement in the state where the marriage contract was never agreed to?

[–]neighborhood_man[S] 24 points25 points26 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Because in the United States we have the "full faith and credit clause" whereby each state has to acknowledge the marriages in other states and also it's divorces.

To prevent the "gaming" of the system on a whole host of issues states often agree to have standard polices. One being that you are not a resident entitled to file a divorce unless you have been a resident of 6 months. Most states follow this.

[–][deleted] 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]TRP VanguardJP_Whoregan 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I only ask because, as far as I'm aware, marriage licenses are issued by the states, and not the federal government. For instance, Texas cannot revoke a New York driver's license (they can revoke the right to drive in that state, but not the license itself).

[–]1iluminatiNYC 9 points10 points11 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

It's called Full Faith and Credit. Each state in the union will recognize the acts of any other state as legal. You can't just tear up a contract in one state because it was written in another state. It is considered legally valid unless proven otherwise.

[–]TRP VanguardJP_Whoregan 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Thanks for the replies, guys, that makes sense. I was looking at it more from a "license" standpoint and not the "contract" issue.

[–]1cover20 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

The divorce can happen pretty much in any state where either party has lived six months. So by US law, a SA marriage is vulnerable to a divorce in any US state.

Other than that, it's a nice idea to get a SA marriage! The theme of the wedding can be "sand".

[–]Endorsed ContributorRedBigMan 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Actually... I think you can always file for divorce in the state where you got married regardless of residency. Ask a lawyer for confirmation though.

I know when some people came up to Canada to get gay married when it became fully legal in Canada they had to go all the way back to Canada to get the divorce because put bluntly the state did not recognize that the two had been married so they would not issue a divorce.

[–]mrp3anut -2 points-1 points0 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Murica!!!!!

Automod is a terrible waste of my life

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points9 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

This guy is a fucking hero. Way to handle your shit, dude.

[–][deleted] 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]1cover20 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Growing up and being alpha involves having a clear view of such sad things, accepting them, and then moving forward in the world as it is, not as one might wish it to be.

[–]Hughtub 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Anyone else want to know more about this trust set up? I think that sounds like an awesome situation, just don't know much about it. I have a bit of money and would like to conceal that as much as possible in the future.

[–]neighborhood_man[S] 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'll write about it. The problem is that it is an expensive (up-front) solution.

[–]backfor 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Here's an asset protection program: Don't get married!

[–]neighborhood_man[S] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Sure, but you can also be sued for all sorts of things

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Family trusts are the bomb!

My family has a a trust several generations old and it is amazing, several properties are owned in the trust and when my parents retire they take their share out, same with me.

The investments are super safe too because being a multi-generation entity means you can play the "long game" with your money.

Also leaves me fairly divorce-proof, All I need to do is be removed as a director of the trust by my family and it closes the legal hole.

[–]tedted8888 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

This is interesting. I will research more.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Financial Adviser / Planner.

[–]2johnnight 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

More and more marriage looks like a bear trap that society wants me to put my dick in.

Why the fuck would she feel entitled to HIS house? Also, this: "the Indiana Courts there include Trusts into the Marital Estate". Just by making more and more of these laws society makes the institution of marriage more and more unappealing.

[–]1kick6 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I'm sure no one in this sub is surprised that the comments are all about the legality of obtaining the information, and no one called her out on the fact that she's a rotten cunt who is mad that her divorce is no longer a fucking payday.

[–]-Viking- 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It was on r/legality. Give her the answer and move on IMO.

[–]RPthrowaway123 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Get owned bitch. Too bad the guy let his anger get the better of him and gave up his advantage.

[–]NakedAndBehindYou 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

our house (it was his when I moved in several years before we got married) is owned by the family Trust, and all of 7 years of Marriage we were paying "rent" to the corporation that "owned" it instead of a mortgage.

It's genius, Jerry! GENIUS!!!

[–]1cover20 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

This is really impressive. He kept that secret for seven years.

I guess she feels mad that he underreported his assets to her, let her think he did not own the house free and clear when actually he did.

That's real enlightened alpha: being just beta-provider enough to give sufficient comfort, while keeping ultimate control. Well played!!

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

He should have said nothing. Silence and a blank stare can crush any female and even most men. People hate being ignored.

[–]Endorsed Contributorredpillbanana 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I love the way she makes it appear that she just happened to move back to Indiana to be with her parents, and it just happened to be 5 months that passed when she decided that things weren't working.

I can imagine the actual conversations that her husband found on the iPad:

"It's been 5 months - one more month until I can file for divorce in Indiana. I hope he doesn't realize that I'm entitled to half his trust fund here! Just have to keep him in the dark for 30 more days, then I can finally serve the papers. Can't wait to go shopping with that trust fund money! I haven't been to Neiman-Marcus in foreva..."

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

This guy is a hero. He should have kept his mouth shut, but other than that, he has my respect.

[–]batfish55 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That poor girl. Now that she doesn't think she's going to get the house and half of his shit, divorce doesn't seem so appealing.

Smooth moves on the guy's part tho. I wonder if The Trust was The Backup Plan in the first place....

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That was so golden. The rest of my day will be better having read that.

[–]busior 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yup use keyloggers. Especially if you're in an LTR

[–]tedted8888 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Anyone have more information on the "family trust" ownership of the house? Seems like a great way to protect the asset.

[–]SenorPuff -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

My knowledge is limited, but essentially, if assets are put into a trust, they aren't really owned by you. You have varying degrees of control over them determined by who else is in the trust with you. If you don't have control or ownership of an asset, then you aren't sharing that with your spouse, so they aren't entitled to a share of it.

It works better with larger groups of people. If I am a part of a trust that is managed by, say, 15 family members, and they decide that my leadership isn't within the best interests of the trust at the same time as a divorce, then presto, I have no controlled assets in that trust, so nothing in it is shared. By keeping a fair portion of your assets this way and having a parachute cord to pull when shit hits the fan, you can effectively nullify legal responsibility to repay something.

[–]neq 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I don't know if it's just me, but this thing reads like a damn Apple commercial.

[–]2 Senior Endorsed Contributorvengefully_yours 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Better move, don't get married, never let them live with you, be ready to kick her ass to the curb in two minutes and fill her slot with another slut.

[–][deleted] 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]trpalternate 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It's so that we can't be accused of vote-brigading.

[–]neighborhood_man[S] 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Why are not allowed to link to the actual threads.

[–]drimadethistocomment -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

read the comment above you again.

[–][deleted] 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[+][deleted] -11 points-10 points-9 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Where in the story does it say that she wants half of his money? Even if she is contesting ownership of the house, you have no reason to think that she didn't contribute to payments on that house. What is the issue here even? They're two people who used to be married, and each went behind the other's backs.

[–]1cover20 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

How did he go behind her back? They did have the use of that house, and they paid rent (equivalent to interest-only mortgage) for it. He provided what she expected.

Please tell the moment that she became morally entitled to more than that.

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

The title of the post said that that woman wanted half of the guy's money. That was not true. She never said she wanted any part of his savings or any other kind of net worth. She just wanted out of the marriage. The title is misleading.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That's why she feels 'violated' because he declared divorce first - to his benefit over hers - right?

Browse all authors
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter