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

They are not even married yet and she is worried about her "entitlements" if the marriage does not work out.

Classictats

September 28, 2017
36 upvotes
/r/MensRights
https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/comments/72vpq2/very_pregnant_and_terrified_of_possibly_grossly/?st=J83UP630&sh=5c21ed78
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 They are not even married yet and she is worried about her "entitlements" if the marriage does not work out.
Author

Classictats

Upvotes 36
Comments 52
Date September 28, 2017 2:45 AM UTC
(8 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/72xb6r/they_are_not_even_married_yet_and_she_is_worried/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/they-are-not-even-married-yet-and-she-is-worried.913728
https://theredarchive.com/post/913728
Top posts by Classictats

Wife's family said she is training me right!

56 upvotes
December 28, 2015
/r/MensRights

Woman arrested for rape at knife point.

19 upvotes
January 19, 2017
/r/MensRights

I find this funny, but also sad because this is the direction our society is moving in.

11 upvotes
January 23, 2018
/r/MensRights

Comments

[–][deleted] 21 points22 points23 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

The comments for that thread are are particularity insightful as to how some women view marriage.

[–]boringcarpets 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

*most if not all

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points9 points 8 years ago (59 children) | Copy Link

Every comment "milk him!" "it's unethical that he wants to keep his pre marriage assets! HOW DARE HE!" dear lord the entitlement to someone else's labour..

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (58 children) | Copy Link

I think wanting to keep your pre marriage assets is fine, but it seems like he wants to keep everything ever for himself, or am I reading that wrong?

1) Fiance wants all his earnings, all items purchased with his earnings, and all increases in value to his assets to be separate property. Additionally wants an alimony waiver.

I think that that is unfair to her, I wouldn't agree to that either if I was to stay home and take care of a child since I would be out of a job for a long time and would thus have problems returning to work if (when) the marriage ends.

[–]Mr_MRAnarchist 8 points9 points10 points 8 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

Why is it unfair to her? She is doing nothing to contribute to his earning, the increase value of the earnings, and any assets that will be purchased, as he will be paying for them all.

She gets to have a child with him (which she admits is her dream) and be a stay at home mom (again, her dream), and be taken care of, and live like a fucking queen, and all she has to do is 1) raise their child, and 2) not leave him.

If she didn't like those options, perhaps she shouldn't have let him knock her up, shouldn't have married him, shouldn't have given up her 100k per year job.

She made her choice to STOP EARNING AND BECOME A DEPENDANT.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago* (7 children) | Copy Link

I'll argue from the standpoint that the child was conceived consensually and that they didn't talk about these demands beforehand (since it isn't the norm). If she somehow tricked him my points are moot.

and all she has to do is [...] not leave him.

If that was the case I would agree with what you wrote. But that's not all that is to it. He can unilaterally decide to leave her and that will leave her with nothing. I don't think she should be entitled to 50% but she should have at least some sort of security.

She will need to do a lot of hard work (taking care of a child is a lot of work) and will have 0 job-security and worse, there is no way she can save up if things outside of her control go sideways. I mean seriously, who would take that deal?

And what makes it worse is that her own assets (her skills) will be deprecated after only a few years, meaning even if something else goes south, she will not be able to easily pick herself up.

[–]bufedad 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I don't think she should be entitled to 50% but she should have at least some sort of security.

Then she can go to work, and earn something to put in the bank that makes her feel secure.

She will need to do a lot of hard work (taking care of a child is a lot of work)

No it isn't. I've got three kids. At one point my wife was working early and late, and on weekends. I got them up, fed, dressed, off to school (and day care), had lunch with the two at day care, picked them all up from day care/school, fed them dinner, got the house cleaned, them bathed and in bed.

It was neither hard, nor horribly time consuming.

I did all of that... on top of my regular job.

[+]SLTSTL1 points 8 years ago [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

taking care of a child is a lot of work

So we pay a lady in our neighborhood $250/week to watch our kid during the day. She watches 4 total. That comes out to around $52K/year, or $13K/year per kid. Her husband is well off and she does this to keep busy and have a nice slush-fund. I just bring that up to assign some sort of monetary value to childcare.

Yes, children are work, but "a lot" can be overblown pretty quickly. I mean, they sleep for around 3 hours during the day. By age 3-4, you start dumping them off at pre-school.

So for the first 6-9 months when they aren't sleeping thru the night, yeah, that sucks. But then it quickly becomes exponentially easier. Then they become mobile and you have another few years of keeping them entertained/not hurting themselves, but then they are off to school.

So say 4 years per kid, 2 kids, 2 years apart, that gives you 6 years of staying home with the kids with varying levels of difficulty. Then what? Hang with the ladies at the country club all day? Go on "Real Housewives of XXX County?" Its not exactly the role of a martyr.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

And why not pay her that money at least? I mean she is putting work in so she should at least be compensated somehow. Again, no to 50/50 but not 0 either.

Let's say you are a lucky grown up and you get your 8h of sleep a night. You said the kid sleeps 3h during the day. That means you spend 13h " at work every day", once you get off you need to do housework. That sounds like a hard job for me.

Once the kids are somewhat selfsustaining she absolutely should get a job! But even then she realistically only can get part time for a few years because the kids somehow need to get to/from school or might need to be cared for during sickness.

The problem with starting after 6 years of being out off a job in the field is that the field will have moved on so much that it will be hard to compete.

Again, not 50/50 but some form a security is only fair, imo.

[–]Mr_MRAnarchist 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Would you place yourself into the complete financial care of another person? Because that's exactly what she did BEFORE she got knocked up. She gave up her job (health reasons) so she could be taken care of. He even told her he was going to get her pregnant. It's not like she did any type of self preservation before hand.

Her security is not being a stay at home mom. Her security is having a kid, going back to work, and hiring a nanny from her 100k+ a year job (assuming she can get on). Her security is the same as his. Build some wealth before you get married and be an adult. I'm sure he wants her to have his kids because she's very attractive and relatively young.

Raising children has NEVER been easier/ safer. She will not have to do a lot of hard work. It's just always being there (which can be contracted out). Here "job" is being a SAHM... which is HER CHOICE. If she doesn't like it.... DON'T DO IT.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

No I wouldn't place myself into the complete financial care of another person. But that is because I can't get pregnant. Being pregnant requires that you can rely on somebody else. And again, in no way shape or form should she have access to his pre wedding assets or get 50/50. I am actually not sure how much I think would be fitting but I don't think 0 (which is what he wants to give her) is fair either. He wants kids (so does she, I know) and somebody has to gestate them and care for them.

If you say the work can be contracted out (and I don't agree that it isn't hard, but that's besides the point) then why not give her the money instead of giving it to a nanny? That way it stays in the family at least.

[–]Mr_MRAnarchist 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

If I am someone's employer... I am paying them to do a specific task how I want it done, when I want it done. If this guy is looking at his wife in the same way, he is paying for everything, so he gets to decide how it gets done and when. Not saying he's right or wrong, simply that if it was me, you bet your ass I would be the one setting the terms. So he wants his wife to raise his kids. If he can afford it, and she agrees to it, then done deal.

It seems to me that she didn't really know fuck all about this guy before she married him and let him knock her up.... so poor choice for her.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It seems to me that she didn't really know fuck all about this guy before she married him and let him knock her up.... so poor choice for her.

That's the only thing I agree 100% with. I just hope both sides get a deal they can agree on.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

So he should be allowed to leave her with nothing because she's taking care of a child they both agreed to have?

I don't think he should have to support her for life after a divorce but she does deserve something for doing that.

[–]Mr_MRAnarchist 4 points5 points6 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

You mean besides a child? Why? Why does she deserve a fucking thing for being taken care of for perhaps 2 decades? Food, clothing, entertainment, trips, being able to raise your child free from want or need?

Sounds like a 20 year holiday from being an adult. Fuck that. If you want to have a kid, fine... go for it. Then once the kid is old enough, get a nanny and go back to work. No adult should be held accountable for the well being of another against their will.

[–]bufedad 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

So he should be allowed to leave her with nothing because she's taking care of a child they both agreed to have?

No, she should be left with nothing, because she chose not to work and earn anything for her to be left with.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I don't think he should have to support her for life after a divorce but she does deserve something for doing that.

You mean, like room and board? Last I knew, living ain't free. I mean, maybe you live in Fairy Fart land where rent is free, food is free, utilities are free.. but back in the real world those things have VALUE.

If she wants him to pay for her, she should also be expected to pay him rent, buy her own food, etc. THAT is equality.

Both positions are providing something. Both are getting something. If you don't like what you get, don't agree to it and move on with life. Find something that works for you. But if you choose that, don't whine you didn't get MORE.

This is the perfect time for her, and him, to realize that this relationship is not going to work and part ways. Well, the perfect time would've been prior to pregnancy. But what can you do.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

She is doing nothing to contribute to his earning, the increase value of the earnings,

That is not true.

She is enabling him to work those hours by staying home to care for the home and child. If not for her contribution of 24/7 free labour he would not be able to have that child and increase his assets as effectively as he would then have to pay for childcare.

She made her choice to STOP EARNING AND BECOME A DEPENDANT.

From her story is sounds more like a mutual decision.

He sounds like an ass and she sounds entitled

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

24/7 free labour

So she pays rent? Buys her own food? It's not free labor. It's an exchange.

[–]Mr_MRAnarchist 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It's hardly "free". I'm sure room and board, clothing, trips, all of that other crap that comes with paying to keep another adult living the same life style as you cost a hell of a lot more then paying someone to raise the kid.

Thinking that women who stay at home to raise the kids are in any way responsible for any part of a mans earnings are delusional. Sure, she is enabling him to focus on his career and have a family... but that's it. If he had to choose one or the other, he would choose to work.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (38 children) | Copy Link

Let me put it this way, let's say you have an account that's worth 100 000 dollars, and you get say 5% interest per year on it, and you're married for 10 years, that's $162,889.46. If you had that before marriage why should the wife be entitled to half of the interest? so about $31 000 dollars, what did she do to contribute to that?

And alimony, let's say the business REALLY hits it off, and 5 years post divorce he's making say 500k a year, why should his wife get 250k of that when they weren't together for all those years?

I think you're grossly misled on how outrageous alimony can be. Now as for her being economically disadvantage upon the seemingly inevitable divorce, she was making 100k before that, and honestly no reason whatsoever child care couldn't paid for based on that, but she left work of her own accord it seems and ... seems to me she's so upset because he's saying "I won't marry you if you're going to be a gold digger, and I want sureties that you won't even try it" ... seems to me she's upset cause he knows her real plan.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (37 children) | Copy Link

I am not saying 50-50 of course, I even think pre-marital assets should not be included, but her whole life will be at another persons mercy since her assets will deprecate (work skills) and he can unilaterally decide to end the marriage, at which point she will have nothing.

She will possibly work for years without any job security, salary or possibility for saving up. I mean who would take such a job?

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

She was making 100k beforehand and left that on her own accord, she has the potential to make her own living and a very good own, she's just saying 'I want to be a leech when we're married and he's letting me!, BUT HE WONT LET ME LEECH AFTER WE SPLIT! " when you really break it down that's her complaint.

she can unilaterally decide to end the relationship and likewise leave him with worse than nothing, being a perpetual alimony slave. No fault divorce it's a thing.

She will not work for years without job security salary or possibility of saving up... look at her background that she states... even if she just worked part time, with NO expenses she could save infinitely more than most people ever dream

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

She has the potential to earn a lot now but not in the future if she doesn't keep up with the competition and new developments. Especially the data science field moves really fast.

she can unilaterally decide to end the relationship and likewise leave him with worse than nothing, being a perpetual alimony slave.

While I am obviously against that, isn't that exactly what he is trying to set to 0? I don't think it should be millions but something to give her time to catch up on lost development and housing should be fine?

even if she just worked part time, with NO expenses she could save infinitely more than most people ever dream

He expects her to do all the child caring and housework though. Even with a part time job at least in the beginning you can't make that work if your partner is at work 80 hours a week. I'd agree with that point if he would split child caring and housework equally.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Bruh at 100k a year, if she kept working, instead of leaving, and his income, child care is a non issue. she's already started the process of leeching and he knows it. ANYONE who's been on the receiving end of divorce can spot that trick. She's literally playing it up to milk him.

[–]bufedad 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

She has the potential to earn a lot now but not in the future if she doesn't keep up with the competition

Then she should go back to work now.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

So she shouldn't have kids?

[–]bufedad 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (31 children) | Copy Link

but her whole life will be at another persons mercy since her assets will deprecate

No, it won't. She has the choice to get a job. She has the choice to earn her own money. She doesn't want to, she wants to live off of his money, and take some with her when she goes.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (30 children) | Copy Link

He also wants kids.

[–]bufedad 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (29 children) | Copy Link

And? Having kids does not require a stay at home parent.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (28 children) | Copy Link

At least in the beginning it means very much that. Sure, you can drop your kid off somewhere, but then you need to pay too.

[–]bufedad 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (27 children) | Copy Link

At least in the beginning it means very much that.

No, it doesn't.

Sure, you can drop your kid off somewhere, but then you need to pay too.

Yep, that's what her $100k per year job is for.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 8 years ago (26 children) | Copy Link

No, it doesn't.

Yes it does. I think this style of arguing doesn't get us anywhere.

Yep, that's what her $100k per year job is for.

So you mean she pays for that place alone, he doesn't pay a dime?

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

We have to remember that this is only one side of the story and I do think that some of the arrangements maybe unreasonable. For instance, the amount of helping around the house on his part. However, what I really noticed was how ready some of the commenters were to "take everything everything he had" just because he was trying to protect what he had worked so hard for. The content in the comments sections makes me wonder if I will ever want to get married again. It's terrifying to think that all my rewards for hard work can be taken away due to my SO having a change of heart.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I absolutely agree with that, the comments are horrible!

Just wanted to point out that I kinda understand her.

[–]babelzum 22 points23 points24 points 8 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

I'll be honest, I didn't read the whole thing. This guy does sound like an asshole though. I'm not sure if missing something, but it seems like she should go out and get another high paying job like she had before and hire a childcare at some point. I mean they could be bringing 300k+, why stay home at all. This whole relationship seems doomed from the get go though. Why would he even get married to begin with and why is she turning down six figures to basically be a servant.

[–]Arby01 5 points6 points7 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

but it seems like she should go out and get another high paying job like she had before and hire a childcare at some point.

Yeah, the op was particularly vague on when she had her $100k/yr job, whether it was before or after she had medical issues. I am betting it was never $100k, and it was short lived and then she had constant medical issues. Now she has a life line out and wants a few years of housekeeping to set her up for life.

However, the guy is definitely undervaluing her and not being reasonable as well. The proposed pre-nup would get tossed out of any court anyways, so she should sign and claim duress later (she is pregnant now and needs support - it's significant economic stress). Any pre-nup would have had to precede the pregnancy, now it's too late. Again, the proposed pre-nup would get tossed out of court in a heart beat anyways as it is too one-sided even without the obvious duress. (tl;dr - he's screwed now regardless )

[–]samsc2 15 points16 points17 points 8 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Not really, he's just protecting himself. SHE has medical issues and no job. He's willing to take care of her while they are married because supposedly she loves him. SHE doesn't want to get a job and instead decided on having a baby which he's ok with as long as SHE keeps up her end of the bargain i/e taking care of things at home while he's away making money to take care of her. It's HER decision to not get a job and to just use him as a piggy bank of sorts. HE just wants to make sure she doesn't fuck him over like women pretty much always do.

[–]AHyperDuck 10 points11 points12 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

The dude needs to fucking bail on his relationship. If you read what this woman says, she says that she wants 50% of his earnings despite being a stay at home mother. But it's okay because she'll give him 50% of her earnings (of $0!) back to him!

And people wonder why men don't get married now.

[–]Aivias 4 points5 points6 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Women have begun this whole 'pregnancy and childbirth is literally torture and I have to sacrifice my body for you to have a child'

Except, Mother Nature decided that. Oh would you look at that? A woman being responsible for womens problems yet again.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

With how you put it, didn't read the entire thing yet so not sure if it's an accurate way to put it, it reminds me of an article I read that proposed "whoever asks someone out should be the one to pay!"

Wow, how generous and progressive of you. It's not like men are still socially expected to do that so it still amounts to men having to pay for dates entirely.

It sounds fair if you don't think about it at all.

[–]emjaytheomachy 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Actually, assuming the basic story is true since we have one side only, he told her if she gets a job she is STILL responsible for 95% of house work/child care... That basic point breaks your narrative.

[+]SLTSTL1 points 8 years ago [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

This guy does sound like an asshole though.

Yup. Very true. But he has every right to be. Just like she has every right to leave him.

Problem is, she thought she won the lottery. Turns out she's just looking to stick on like a leech and he knows it.

I mean she goes on how he works at least 80 hours a week. That's 11.5 hours a day - 7 days a week.....I'm pretty sure this is more of a business relationship for both of them than anything. This isn't love. He needs a wife and kid, she wants to stay at home and live a life of luxury. The terms have been spelled out. She can take it or leave it.

These quotes though, I'm dying laughing. She's about to land a whale that according to her: "Within 6 months assets likely valued at around 8M." and here is how she feels.

I am aghast and desperate.

.

I feel trapped and terrified.

.

How can he possibly think that a full-time live in nanny/maid should only be paid room and board? When her IQ is one in a quarter million and she attended the same ivy league school he did? It pains me.

Then go be your own CEO and get your own millions of dollars, ha!

I feel bereft and desperate about my and my child's future.

.

(I'm happy with a "cap" -- say 5M or something in the unlikely even our marital property would exceed 10M -- I don't need to be filthy rich, whatever.)

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

How can he possibly think that a full-time live in nanny/maid should only be paid room and board? When her IQ is one in a quarter million and she attended the same ivy league school he did? It pains me.

If he's worth a few million, then it'd be pretty nice room and board.

And you don't need your live-in maid to be intelligent, she just needs to be good at her job. And going to an ivy league school doesn't help you clean toilets any better.

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Reading the whole thing shes a red pill woman that made him red pill...and is now surprised he is putting trp lessons into action.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 8 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

Honestly she's entitled to nothing and this is why 50% shared custody should be the default and only possible to challenge under very special circumstances.

Odds are that he's only dragging his feet into marriage due to a very misguided adherence to cultural expectations. The only thing he needs to worry about really is taking care of his child. Not an adult woman.

[–]emjaytheomachy 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Its BS when feminists play the "she is only acting that way because of cultural expectations" card and its BS to play it for the man also.

He doesn't want to take care of the child equally (assuming the story accurate, we only have half of the story) he wants her to be responsible for 95% even IF she gets a job.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

God the comments on that are depressing. A man is a villain if he thinks a woman must be married to him to be entitled to the fruits of his labors.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

If he is already refusing to let her have anything after a divorce that's a good sign she should not stop working and they need to find other arrangements for childcare.

[–]VoxVirilis 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I hope, for his sake, he doesn't marry her.

[–]samsc2 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That's just sad. The poor guy has no idea what kind of entitled woman he's now stuck with. She's getting completely taken care of and all he's asking is that she takes care of the house while he's away and she doesn't get to have everything he's worked so hard for. Then the comments... holy shit there's people literally saying they would castrate their "loved" ones if they did what he did as if trying to protect yourself calls for the removal of genitals.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Good grief, this relationship sounds absolutely exhausting. Forget the details. They probably shouldn't even be together.

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