Prenups

geckorisk · 2019-02-14T04:30:42+00:00

Prenups are toilet paper and will get thrown out. Don't get married.

re_all · 2019-02-14T04:59:13+00:00

Ask yourself this;

What financial, legal, or social-economical benefit does signing a contract that binds you to provide a benefit to a THOT, and in the same contract, allows her to cease providing you with a benefit?

And if you break that contract, or if she decides to break that contract; you are liable to lose half your life.

Prenups are thrown out at a whim. Don’t be unintelligent. Never get married

DangZagnut · 2019-02-14T04:34:18+00:00

Prenups can't violate law.

Prenups are useless without you paying a huge amount of money.

Prenups don't help anyone in the lower 50% of men, that no one cares about.

cycloneous · 2019-02-14T05:09:03+00:00

Pre-nuptial agreements are great to have BUT if you get a activist judge that is infected liberalism, aka, Patriarchy Derangement Syndrome (PDS), say good-bye to your pre-nuptial agreement!

I'm a huge advocate of these types of agreements however, depending on the State that it was created, it has to meet certain criteria before it can even considered valid let alone enforceable.

For example:

it must be signed by both parties prior to marriage,
can not be signed under duress
there can not be any clause that violates any rights of the spouse
both parties must understand their rights and duties, otherwise it voids the contract
the agreement must be considered fair or can not be viewed as one sided**

Now you may think this is common sense stuff, but progressive States like California, New York, New Jersey, where what you or I may consider fair and equatable, a judge with PDS may find it to be unconscionable, therefore your pre-nuptial agreement is invalid.

Check out the Uniform Premarital Agreements Act (UPAA); it is a code that governs how pre-nuptials should be created, and enforced. Last time I checked only 25 States have enacted it.

lonewolfsigmamgtow · 2019-02-14T06:31:41+00:00

Prenups do not stand a chance in courts.

Texian_Fusilier · 2019-02-14T04:34:12+00:00

Prenups hav err a chance for now, but throw more out by the day. In the US.

I'm surprised the EU and 1🇬🇧 havent banned the practice outright. But the effect is the same.

Dont get married.

LuckyBastarred · 2019-02-14T04:43:36+00:00

I don't see what the government has to do with me falling in love with someone at all. I will have the ceremony and give the ring but I am not signing any paperwork. Anyone have any thoughts on this?

DWShimoda · 2019-02-14T08:09:18+00:00

Pre-Nuptial agreements originated when one or both of the parties getting married came INTO the relationship with SUBSTANTIAL assets (often inherited but not necessarily so) -- and generally ONLY discussed or delineated that those assets (those pre-existing assets) were essentially to be "walled off" as NOT being a fruit of the marital relationship.*

That's basically it -- that's about ALL they can "legally" and "legitimately" expect to cover and include -- any attempt to stretch beyond that: to the custody of or provisions for children born into that marriage; to later income, major new business development, etc. is likely to "pooch" the whole thing (possibly having it thrown out, otherwise simply "overridden" by "other concerns" or developments: "best interests of the children" and/or various claims of compensation for "maternal sacrifice" {i.e. she quit working to be a SAHM, etc}).

Most people don't "fit" that equation, and moreover they do not MAINTAIN that situation.**

They are NOT some "silver bullet solution" to prevent getting "divorce raped" for the typical male (lower 99% wealth).

* Though they are not the ONLY, and not necessarily the BEST, way to do so... they were, are, and in certain specific scenarios still can be effective for that purpose -- yes, even in "marital property" jurisdictions -- but there are MANY caveats relative to them in those cases.

Per example, let's say 2 relatively successful people in their 30's or 40's marry -- each of them already own a home and/or business or other income generating property (possibly something they built up while they were single, possibly something they inherited); the "value" of their respective property assets NEED NOT (and probably isn't "equal") -- they BOTH have some assets, they are both "savvy" both have their own concerns, they both have their own INDIVIDUAL legal counsel; and the point of the prenuptial agreement which they MUTUALLY want, they MUTUALLY negotiate, MUTUALLY arrive at and agree to... is not so much to prevent the other party from obtaining "value" but rather the "preservation of the asset with the original owning party [in the original family]." (Possibly they each have children from a previous marriage, etc.)

** It is important to note that the above (*) really only remains true (generally speaking)... so long as they do NOT "disturb" those assets -- that is they do not sell them off, substantially alter them/invest or intermix "marital" income & assets into and with them -- then, if they HAVE maintained them as such "separate" things, should that couple "divorce" a few years (or even a decade or two) later, such a "prenup" is likely to actually "survive" and govern the disposition of those assets. (But other factors -- especially CHILDREN from the marriage -- CAN still override it.)

Of course... most people DON'T do that -- first they do not typically create a "mutually negotiated" agreement (which is expen$ive), it's far more common that the arrangement is significantly (if not grossly/egregiously) "lopsided" and pushed for by just ONE party, and then some boilerplate 'fill in form' style document -- furthermore they either do not really HAVE such substantial pre-existing assets; or if they DO, they do not "preserve" them as such for very long, but rather sooner or later they intermix/intermingle them, both with each other's assets and/or with "marital" stage income & assets (i.e. hubby & wifeling both "own" houses {maybe even 'rental properties'}, he has $300k of equity in his, she has $50k of equity in hers; they SELL {or use them as collateral, remortgage/HELOC} one or both houses and use the money garnered/the credit obtained to purchase a NEW house -- guess what? They just fucked any "prenup" they may have signed; probably regardless of how carefully it was negotiated.)

swankvagabond · 2019-02-14T09:26:49+00:00

but in reality some of you may do so .

No, we don't. MGTOW follow this: Don't get married. Don't have children. Don't cohabitate.

And prenups are worthless even they get thrown like garbage in court rooms.

Mecha_Hobbit · 2019-02-15T00:44:38+00:00

Family Courts are run by feminists. That Pre-nup will be thrown out. Don't kid yourself.

Why do you think the rulings are kept secret? Unlike civil & criminal court, which is public information.

You know they don't have to follow any rules, right? I'm not kidding.

You may want to watch 'Misandry Today' channel on You Tube.

Unthotful · 2019-02-14T04:37:07+00:00

It's going to vary from state to state. That's part of the problem. Bottom line, if you must get married, contact a good lawyer familiar with the relevant law. But even better, just dont get married.

Title	Prenups
Author	CuntarianOverlord
Upvotes	7
Comments	18
Date	February 14, 2019 4:29 AM UTC (7 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MGTOW
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MGTOW/comments/aqfvwf/prenups/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MGTOW/prenups.512292 https://theredarchive.com/post/512292

Comments

They are NOT some "silver bullet solution" to prevent getting "divorce raped" for the typical male (lower 99% wealth).