As brutal as the whole thing is, two parts are especially bad:
The first is where in Canada, you can't get divorced for one year after filing the paperwork -- I suppose this is a way the state tries to make you work it out. However, in this case, she went full cunt. Since the courts force the banks accounts to stay shared, she had full access of it. She ends up spending over a million dollars within that year, doing things from travelling around the world to redecorating the house from end to end multiple times. All while he lives on his small boat.
Another is the after effects. He divorced at the height of his career so his alimony and child support was pegged to that income. So even after he goes on making less and less money, he still has to pay the same. The courts don't care if you're broke working as a waiter, you still have to pay that alimony of 50k a month, or as the judge said, "I don't care, you still have a legal obligation." And on top of all that child support, he has to pay for EVERYTHING the kids need from private school to clothes and health issurance. She literally gets to pocket all the child support and ends up using it to travel around the world with the kids with a hired nanny.
Meanwhile, he's broke and struggling, and she never has to work a day in her life ever again.
What incentive do women have to make marriages like this work out when they know they can just go on and live never having to work again. I suppose the only downside is she can't get married again. But for 500k a year, I'd be okay with just committed relationships from then on for the rest of my life.
What incentive do men have to get married again?
Marriage laws are archaic. They root from a time when a divorced woman was unmarriable, a time when there weren't even any unmarried around her divorced age, but even then, the single men saw a divorcee as toxic and not wife material.
So it makes sense for the time. If the marriage was going downhill, the woman would try her best to make the marriage work in fears that she'd never be able to find a quality partner again. And the man would try to make it work in hopes of saving all of his money. Which is why marriages were thought out, and divorce rates were low.
But now things have changed, for the better on the social level. These stigmas no longer exist, cool. But the laws haven't changed in relation. And soon as you try to advocate for a change in marriage laws, the feminists jump on you for being an evil MRA.
Don't get married, and if you do, DO NOT have a stay at home wife. The stay at home wives are the ones are the ones that turn men to suicide via divorce.