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

Are Pre-Nups worth the paper they are written on?

as_yet_untitled

September 6, 2015
19 upvotes
/r/MensRights
http://www.familylawexpress.com.au/family-law-decisions/binding-financial-agreement-2/post-nuptial-agreement/thorne-kennedy-2015-fcca-484/
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 Are Pre-Nups worth the paper they are written on?
Author

as_yet_untitled

Upvotes 19
Comments 38
Date September 6, 2015 1:13 AM UTC
(10 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/3jt54u/are_prenups_worth_the_paper_they_are_written_on/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/are-pre-nups-worth-the-paper-they-are-written-on.971919
https://theredarchive.com/post/971919
Top posts by as_yet_untitled

Women more Violent and Controlling than Men: Study

589 upvotes
July 28, 2015
/r/PussyPassDenied

Mother who faked Child Abuse Allegations Loses Custody

45 upvotes
August 9, 2015
/r/MensRights

Inside the Mind of a Psychotic Feminist

23 upvotes
June 27, 2015
/r/PussyPassDenied

New Campaign Making Fun of Men's Rights

23 upvotes
June 29, 2015
/r/MensRights

Study on gender Discrimination and Family Law in Australia

21 upvotes
November 14, 2015
/r/MensRights

Imprisoned for false accusation of rape

20 upvotes
July 3, 2015
/r/MensRights

Violence Against Men – The hidden disease

12 upvotes
September 24, 2015
/r/MensRights

Violence Against Men – What Support Services & Resources are available for Men

7 upvotes
July 28, 2015
/r/MensRights

Comments

[–]mwobuddy 9 points10 points11 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Prenups haven't been regularly upheld in a while, because by marrying a woman who is far below social status, you create a new world for her, and it would put her through undue stress to be forced to not live the life she's become accustomed to since you married her, given that you had money and she had looks.

The answer is that prenups have been near useless for a while. Getting married to someone who isn't your financial equal is a big mistake for a guy to make, unless he's willing to part with a large part of his assets or money in exchange for a few years of sex with an attractive, but poor, woman.

[–]geniice 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Prenups haven't been regularly upheld in a while,

Depends on the jurisdiction. Given the number of them out there compared to reports of them not being upheld this in any case seems unlikely.

What the courts do appear to be tending towards is rejecting highly disproportional pre-nups but its not clear how common those are.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

What the courts do appear to be tending towards is rejecting highly disproportional pre-nups but its not clear how common those are.

As common as rich people getting divorced?

[–]as_yet_untitled[S] 6 points7 points8 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

This is a remarkable court case of a man doing everything right regarding pre-nups, and still being screwed in the end.

I am pretty sure this would never happen if the woman was the richer party.

[–]ABC_Florida 6 points7 points8 points 10 years ago* (19 children) | Copy Link

Why did she have no choice? Is she a minor? She could have said no.

[–]mwobuddy 9 points10 points11 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

She likely "had no choice" because she was poor and therefore not an equal partner in the relationship.

[–]ABC_Florida 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Or simply she is greedy and the government is for slavery of men.

[–]geniice 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

A Pre-nup is a contract. The concept of duress in contracts is pretty well established (although rather messy due to case-law). What exactly is your objection to it in this case?

[–]ABC_Florida 6 points7 points8 points 10 years ago* (15 children) | Copy Link

The thing is that she had a great opportunity and she's making it look like she had no choice.

[–]geniice 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

How she is making it look is irrelevant. The lady in question isn't the court. The courts have ruled that the contract was signed under duress. How do you think that they have misapplied the law in this case?

[–]ABC_Florida 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

Well, the court acted because she have made legal actions.

And being being 30 something you can legitimately suppose that she's mature enough to know the consequences of her actions, unless the man was a pedophile and she lied about her age.

[–]geniice 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

The court isn't ruling on her maturity but if she acted under duress or not.

[–]ABC_Florida 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago* (11 children) | Copy Link

What is your point? That you can sell your house get the money, don't find a sufficient apartment for the money, go to court, whine and void the sale? Grown ups are responsible for their action. Period. Male or female, both. Period. If a nation want responsible citizen, it shouldn't support such legal loopholes. If you want to whine to someone, so seek elsewhere!

[–]geniice 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

What is your point? That you can sell your house get the money, don't find a sufficient apartment for the money, go to court, whine and void the sale?

No that is not how duress works.

Look I understand that duress is a complex legal principle but if you want to disagree with it you should probably spend at least some time finding out what it is.

Grown ups are responsible for their action. Period.

So if I threaten to shoot your dog if you don't buy a copy of superman 64 off me for AUD$4,000 and you agree you would regard that as a valid contract.

[–]ABC_Florida 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

And where was she threatened? Was that man going after her to kidnap her like Borat did to Pamela?

You are ridiculous!

[–]geniice 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

And where was she threatened?

Threats do not have to be explicit and the details are explained in the ruling. Perhaps you would like to read it.

[–]mikesteane 5 points6 points7 points 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

The decision seems to be that since the woman had no negociating power, the prenup was invalid. By the same logic, no one should have to pay fines or lawyer's fees, neither of which are negotiable.

[–]geniice 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

That isn't contract law. Duress as a defence under criminal law is rather more limited (but still rather messy).

[–]RedditorJemi 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

How is making an agreement with a lawyer not contract law? What branch of law is it?

[–]geniice 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

When courts award costs there is no contract involved (nor an agreement with the lawyer for that matter).

[–]RedditorJemi 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Oh, I thought he was referring to the fees a person pays to his or her own lawyers.

[–]kizzan 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yes. If all you are trying to get is the value of the paper out of your wife, about 2 cents, all you have to do is tell her you have a prenuptial agreement and you will fight in court but we can settle for 2 cents. She will most likely accept.

[–]mikesteane 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

He made the contract with the wrong person. He should have given the house to his heirs with a condition that he be allowed to occupy it as long as he lives.

[–]geniice 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

He was worth AUD$20 million. I don't think all his money was in his house.

[–]nick012000 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

That doesn't help when the pre-nup was about what'd happen after he died (namely, that all of his money was to go to his children).

[–]mikesteane 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

In practice, it could have exactly the same effect.

[–]LawExpress 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

Very very clever suggestion. Do you know how many millions would have been saved with this simple suggestion? But men only think about the implications of divorce when its too late.

[–]mikesteane 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Thank you. Do you think I should make a main post of it?

[–]LawExpress 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Definitely

[–]as_yet_untitled[S] 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I second that!

[–]geniice 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

He didn't get divorced. He died.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

His point still stands though

[–]geniice 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

What men thinking about the implications of divorce? I think when you are dead it ceases to be a problem.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah. I dont think he was talking about this case. Although, the point also still stands for this case.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Even if he had given her something, the judge could have thrown it out as "not enough".

The most interesting thing tho, is the idea of "duress". Really? She had two choices:

a) live her life the way it's always been

b) sign papers saying she won't fuck him over, and then live a rich life.

Once that carrot is dangled in front of her... it's a HARDSHIP for her to go back and live a normal life as a normal woman.

See how women are oppressed? They're made to live as people! And when someone holds them responsible for their decisions as an adult... well holy FUCK we can't have that. /s

[–]ABC_Florida 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

The sad thing is that the government justifies this kind of behavior. That man worked his life, raised his children, wanted a partner after divorce. The only mistake he had made was choosing this woman.

It is clearly privilege (either by a silly law which applies to prenups too or by a law privileging women). If the genders were turned this would be the same disgusting story. But of course the one who steals the money won't feel bad about it.

[–]bluewing 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Nope. The longer the marriage lasts, the more "co-mingled" assets become.

And for you young guys, you very seldom own anything of great value at the beginning anyway.

[–]SupremeAuthority 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I think we need to make all men aware of this.

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