all 142 comments

[–]PizzaismyJam 122 points123 points  (2 children)

This was a fantastic post WAY better than the usual AWALT because Becca fucked her neighbor for a can of soda and a used condom.

While I understand the automod bot, please can a real mod bother to read this to make sure it doesn't dissapear.

Discourse is the hammer through which any RP should forge his ideas.

[–]Telochi 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I agree, this was a very well thought out post.

[–]1independentmale 63 points64 points  (17 children)

Outstanding post. Only one nitpick:

50/50 is only the starting point for negotiation. Women can and do get more, often much more. My ex got about 2/3rds. Even if you do get 50/50, it's more like 30/30/40 with the lawyers taking the 40%.

The value of assets is not always easy to calculate. Consider my home, worth about half a million on paper but realistically I'd be lucky to get $350k in this market. I wanted it, I kept it, but I had to buy it out of the marriage at full price. Lesson learned: Don't get attached to things. If there is a dispute on value - and there will be - insist on selling the item and splitting the proceeds 50/50. That's the fairest way to go about it.

Lawyers can and will drag things out for years at $300+ an hour. This is a fun and lucrative game for them. My ex's attorney promised her 3x my gross net worth and that's what they sued me for. He knows damn well that's not possible to get, but she doesn't and I spent some ten grand on my own lawyer to fight their ridiculous claims as to my financial position. Meanwhile her lawyer billed her a similar amount for his services. The lawyers all win in the end no matter what.

The earlier you settle, the better you are. My dispute mediation session was $750 per hour (two lawyers at $300 each and a mediator at $150) and lasted an entire afternoon. We came down to an unfair agreement that resulted in my writing her a check for an extra $30,000 she should never have been entitled to. It was either that or go to trial and spend another year and $20-40k more on lawyers and maybe still wind up giving her the $30k (or more) anyway. I wrote the check because it was statistically the better option.

When you're done getting screwed over in divorce court, broke and penniless, there is no reprieve because the monthly payments start immediately. Most women get some type of alimony or maintenance payment from their ex husband and if you have kids there's child support on top of that. If you lose your job and can't make the payments, many states will put you in jail. How you're supposed to find another job so you can pay what you owe while you're behind bars is anybody's guess. If you get another job that doesn't pay as much, too bad - reducing your transfer payment is difficult and often outright impossible.

When I added it all up, the 2/3rds she walked with, on top of the attorney's fees and monthly child support checks for several years, this experience cost me more than everything I had at the time of the divorce. And my new girlfriend still has the audacity to suggest I do it all over again.

A man should go into his divorce assuming a complete bankruptcy, full reset and start his life over. Then he won't be disappointed if by some miracle he gets to keep some small fraction of his net worth.

One last comment: It was totally fucking worth it. Every last cent and bit of mental anguish. That's the price of freedom. I should have done it years earlier. If you're miserable in your marriage, GTFO. Every day you wait costs you more.

[–]smokingmonkey420 24 points25 points  (3 children)

Fucking vampires. I wonder how they sleep at night.

[–]clearlyathrowaway323 16 points17 points  (0 children)

They cum in your girl and let the neurochemistry do the rest

[–]1exit_sandman 4 points5 points  (0 children)

They don't, they sleep during the day. In a coffin.

[–]1User-31f64a4e 1 point2 points  (0 children)

They sleep soundly. That's part of what the Hampster is for.

[–]1rp_aware[S] 15 points16 points  (3 children)

Just want to echo something in this comment.

My parents divorced when I was in my early teens. Both of them are very successful professionals. On the whole the divorce was very amicable, very smooth, and not costly (under $10k for both lawyers).

Something my mother did do however was use the valuation of intangible assets to her advantage - not just of their home (which she did do), but also of my father's professional practice. In my father's estimation she was able to walk away with something like ~$500k over and above what would have been a completely fair split.

Valuation is a large determining factor in divorce settlement. Yes you can sell a house, but you can't necessarily sell something like a business.

[–]1 Endorsed Contributorvandaalen 2 points3 points  (2 children)

I can only give points for comments, but your post surely is worth one, so you get it here.

Very elaborate, nicely formated and well-written. Nice work!

[–]Upvote Me!trpbot[M] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Confirmed: 1 point awarded to /u/rp_aware by vandaalen. [History]

[This is an Automated Message]

[–]1rp_aware[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks! What does a point do?

EDIT: I figured it out, it's the red [1]. Thanks again.

[–]ex_astris_sci 2 points3 points  (0 children)

If you're miserable in your marriage, GTFO

I cannot stress the importance of that enough.

[–]Fetish_Goth 5 points6 points  (5 children)

You can do better than 50/50 if you're smart. It's like a lesson from "How to Win Friends and Influence People".

“Personally I am very fond of strawberries and cream, but I have found that for some strange reason, fish prefer worms. So when I went fishing, I didn’t think about what I wanted. I thought about what they wanted. I didn't bait the hook with strawberries and cream. Rather, I dangled a worm or grasshopper in front of the fish and said: "Wouldn't you like to have that?"

“When dealing with people, let us remember we are not dealing with creatures of logic. We are dealing with creatures of emotion, creatures bristling with prejudices and motivated by pride and vanity.”

These two seem contradictory, but they're not. Get what you want by making the other person want it too. It helps to frame it in a way that speaks to their pride and vanity. If you're not a shitbag, she is divorcing you for selfish reasons. Use it to your advantage.

[–]switchme808 6 points7 points  (4 children)

I don't understand how you would go about convincing her to give up less than half, especially when she's paying a high priced lawyer, and that lawyer is telling her the exact opposite.

[–]1independentmale 8 points9 points  (2 children)

You can't. Once the lawyers enter the scene, it's game over. They pit the couple against one another for fun and profit.

I knew this going into my divorce and convinced my wife that it would be smarter to do it ourselves and keep our money instead of wasting it on lawyers. She agreed and we did an amicable 50/50 split. She took her half and moved out.

Six months later a judge signed the final papers. An hour after that, a lawyer showed up, claimed she was forced to sign the settlement under duress (total bullshit) and undid the entire thing. Her bitch ass best friend who hates me convinced her that I must have tons of money hidden in offshore accounts or some such nonsense. I didn't. She had already cleaned out all of my cash accounts in exchange for my keeping the equity in the house. She had six figures cash, I had a couple grand left.

I had to sell off assets that were rightfully mine in order to pay the legal bills and write her that final check. Lost my bike, some guns and a vehicle.

"Duress" is impossible to defend against. She and I sat in front of a judge on 3 separate occasions over those six months and each time she willingly signed the documents we had put together and told the judge this was what she wanted. After, all she had to say was that I forced her to do it, that she didn't really want to but I convinced her against her better judgment and she didn't have legal representation and didn't know what she was signing. Actually, she didn't even have to say any of that, her lawyer said it all for her and just like that, everything was undone, no proof required.

Joke is on her, she burned through all the money in a couple of years living large while not working and is now struggling to pay rent on her ridiculously expensive apartment. Meanwhile I still have my little palace of a house and my six figure job and am rebuilding my life. I've already replaced most of the money she took.

[–]Fetish_Goth 5 points6 points  (1 child)

Six months later a judge signed the final papers. An hour after that, a lawyer showed up, claimed she was forced to sign the settlement under duress (total bullshit) and undid the entire thing.


She and I sat in front of a judge on 3 separate occasions over those six months and each time she willingly signed the documents we had put together and told the judge this was what she wanted.

Sorry bro, but I think you did it to yourself. You both did it without a lawyer? You drafted the papers yourself? Good lord, man. Even if it's amicable, you always have a lawyer draft the papers and handle all the filing and shit! This is a system created by lawyers FOR lawyers. Always get a lawyer to handle your legal shit unless you ARE a lawyer, or just a masochist.

[–]DaegobahDan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

At least get a fucking notary! It's two fucking bucks!

[–]Fetish_Goth 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's never a good idea to marry a career woman, but even so, there should be no reason she ever gets more than 50% no matter what lawyer she has.

[–]swagrabbit 0 points1 point  (0 children)

IAAL: you got a bad attorney or a bad judge. This is not the standard. An attorney charging you 'tens of thousands' in a divorce is extreme in my experience unless you are very wealthy.

It is extremely unlikely that an asset split will favor someone by that proportion. Honestly, I don't believe your numbers.

This post is not legal advice - if you're about to go through divorce, speak to a few attorneys, listen to what they say, and hire one. Don't rely on the internet, and don't try to talk to every attorney in an area to prevent an ex from using one. It's both stupid and ineffective.

Anyways, I'm not a RP person and I don't agree with many of the RP viewpoints, but I hope that some folks in the community will read this and understand that it paints an inaccurate picture of divorce proceedings.

[–]MoneyStatusLooks 24 points25 points  (8 children)

This is a very well thought out, superb post. Hit the nail on the head!

My LTR has been hinting at how she want's marriage. Frankly it terrifies me, especially because im from the UK and there are no prenups & I have a very high net worth for my age. Honestly, I am coming to the mindset now that I will never want to be married, no matter what. This shit is scary!

[–]Ovadox 10 points11 points  (1 child)

If you're high value in the money department and other areas she'll stick around even if you don't marry. If for some reason she leaves well, you're still high value, won't be hard to find Ms.Next.

[–]MoneyStatusLooks 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I think this is true. I had a conversation with her after reading this post, which went something along the lines of:

"You need to know that I am very skeptical of marriage and I may not wan't to ever get married. I'm not saying never, but I don't see any actual upside in it for me. I just thought it would be fair to tell you that, so you are not under any illusions".

To which she pretty much replied with: "Yeah I have dreams and one day wan't to get married, but I love you for who you are (blah blah), don't love you for your money (blah blah) and just wan't to be with you no matter what, whatever that journey entails"

LTR 3 years.

[–]TekkomanKingz 5 points6 points  (2 children)

No prenups allowed in the UK??? WTF.

[–]master_baiter 6 points7 points  (1 child)

They have post nups where right after the wedding you can get a contract spelling out the asset division like a pre nup. Of course if she backs out of signing it after the marriage contract is official I don't know if there's much recourse.

[–]rebuildingMyself 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Damn honeypot trap. Let's just get married baby then I'll sign a postnup :)

[–]Diarrhoea_Shower 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Have a wedding but just dont sign a marriage license. Say it's because you don't want the government to get into your personal life or whatever.

[–]1FunAndFreedom 2 points3 points  (1 child)

I do not let issues fester like that. It isn't healthy for you. If she is hinting at marriage you can dodge the issue and have this on your back for the next 2-3 years, but it won't go away.

Or you can confront it head on, say no to marriage, and she will either A) Leave the relationship and you move to the next girl or B) Capitulates and you put a stake in the marriage issue.

How people can live their life with lingering issues like that astounds me.

[–]MoneyStatusLooks 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I agree. 100%. I was feeling a bit of cognitive dissonance the other day, because I felt like she wanted something I was very sceptical about. I made sure to talk to her about it (see my other reply).

[–]Blake55 18 points19 points  (13 children)

Thanks for the quality post. Just wondering how you can reconcile all that you've written above with the fact it sounds like you're progressing down the marriage path? Is there anything you've done to protect yourself? (ie in partner choice, asset management)

[–]1rp_aware[S] 3 points4 points  (2 children)

Is there anything you've done to protect yourself?

The only way to protect yourself that I know of is to put your assets in someone else's name (who you damn well trust). But even then, you cannot contribute new income to that fund since half of every dollar you earn as her husband is hers.

Just wondering how you can reconcile all that you've written above with the fact it sounds like you're progressing down the marriage path?

After doing the soul-searching that went into this post...

When I feel personally ready to start a family, I will be open to marrying someone who I trust as an equal partner in that venture. Why marry? The inconvenient truth is, you can't really have kids with a woman and be unattached financially. Family law doesn't allow for that. Maybe she won't get the lump sum in divorce; but whatever she requires the courts will award to her in child support and alimony.

Me personally, I am absolutely nowhere near ready to start a family. I've seen how much my life can change in a short period of time, and I recognize that I have the gift of a long runway. Might that cause my relationship to end at some point? It might. But I'm enjoying my relationship so punting seemed the best option this time.

[–]beginner_ 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I could just say marriage is not an option for you. It's like a reversed shit test. Shows her you are not afraid of walking away or her walking away. And then it also test her because if she sees you as beta bucks she will run or else she will suddenly be more affectionate.

[–]rpquest -1 points0 points  (0 children)

equal partner

Nope. Should be inferior and submissive.

[–]3 Endorsed ContributorSkorchZang 13 points14 points  (8 children)

Guy: "She wants marriage. OK, I can prepare, I can build what I need for it, I can do it right and I'll do my best to make it work."

That's the admirable attitude of a quality man. Self-sacrifice, give the woman everything she needs & wants, even if you already assume the worst and are shouldering all of the risk no matter what you do.

A scumbag however would ask a different question: "She wants marriage. OK. What's in it for me?" She says Marriage2.0 is building something that's greater than us both? Bitch, please!

[–]aptway 14 points15 points  (3 children)

Are you implying that the "quality man" is a noble fool then, or what?

[–]3 Endorsed ContributorSkorchZang 10 points11 points  (0 children)

It's better to leave such things unspecified, that way we're helping the chance reader get used to spotting on their own the usurous ulteriour motives that are hiding behind the chest-swelling praise usually given out to men in these situations.

[–]rebuildingMyself 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Society under marriage 1.0 rewarded the quality man's actions. She wanted marriage and it was just as much her responsibility as his not to fuck it up.

[–]tsotha 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It's hard to come to any other conclusion from a green-eyeshades perspective. You have to bring in children and religion for marriage to make any kind of sense for a man.

[–]CreateTheFuture 0 points1 point  (0 children)


Guy: "She wants marriage. No."

That's the admirable attitude of a quality man.

[–]1FunAndFreedom 0 points1 point  (2 children)

Marriage makes no sense and provides no benefit to the man. The only reason I can see for marriage are visa issues and political reasons. Outside of those areas (and be really careful there) marriage needs to be avoided.

[–]beginner_ 0 points1 point  (1 child)

There are enough women why would you choose one that will result in visa issues?

[–]1FunAndFreedom -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Visa issues are unavoidable if you aren't living in America regularly. If you end up with a European girl you can get dual citizenship and eventual access to their countries social services.

It an example of a benefit to marriage, of course one that really needs to be carefully weighed against the cost.

[–]aptway 33 points34 points  (0 children)

Anything that takes away your power to walk away, takes away your power.

This is the most important argument against Marriage. It changes the dynamic completely in a way that is very unpredictable and difficult to account for. With no built-in dread of you being able to walk away scot-free, Marriage 2.0 becomes a very bad prospect for men indeed.

[–]Adolf_ghandi 12 points13 points  (11 children)

A question that always bothers me when I read this stuff:

If both of you work and you feel it is ending. Can you just quit your job, file divorce a week later and sue HER for alimony?

[–]kranos33 22 points23 points  (5 children)

No, it is "potential" earnings. If you have been making 120k in average for your last three years, that's what your potential earning is.

You loose your job, your are fucked. You become slave of the alimony and child support payments.

[–]Adolf_ghandi 9 points10 points  (4 children)


Thank you for the fast answer.

[–][deleted]  (3 children)


    [–]awfukbye 0 points1 point  (2 children)

    There is plenty of assholes on this earth and a good percentage will still have kids we will last. Lol

    [–]Elodrian 2 points3 points  (1 child)

    That's not the point of what he's saying. It's not a "survival of the species" question. The problem is that we have created a set of laws that set the good of the individual at odds with the good of the species. When laws create natural dischord of this type, it signals something is wrong with the laws.

    [–]awfukbye -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

    i think ur autism is showing

    [–]copralalic 5 points6 points  (0 children)

    No, but if you were become disabled somehow prior to the divorce, it would reduce your future earnings. I saw a guy at a health clinic once who "recovered" from schizophrenia. Crazy, I know. Defrauding Social Services (or whoever pays disability payments) is a crime, and I would never advocate a crime, but if no disability papers were filed then no crime would have been committed. wink-wink

    [–]tsotha 3 points4 points  (2 children)

    The legal term is "imputed income", or "I know you can make $x so I'm going to set your support based on $x."

    A lot of guys think "Well, if I get divorced I'll open a dive shop and kind of take it easy. I won't make a lot of money, but who cares? She's taking half of it anyway." Which would be a perfectly reasonable strategy, but the judge will base his support payments on what he made at that high stress corporate job. So it's back to the cubicle.

    [–]1independentmale 2 points3 points  (1 child)

    It's basically indentured servitude.

    [–]tsotha 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Pretty much, yeah, though the details vary depending on the state.

    [–]jackbauer634 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    Dalrock summarizes nicely:

    "You can see this at the micro level with a man whose wife goes Jenny Erikson on him. The courts understand that throwing a man out of the home and taking away his children naturally reduces the man’s normal incentive to work to support his family. How could it not? It isn’t that most men in this situation will stand by and watch their children starve, but they won’t be motivated to produce quite as much. You can confiscate a percentage of his income in the form of child support, but he no longer has the incentive to fight his way quite so high up our progressive tax structure. This is why the courts have to assign the man an income quota he has to meet, Soviet style. Imputation of income isn’t incidental to the child support family model; it is essential to the function of the model. Note that this doesn’t mean the courts have to formally calculate an income quota for each man who ends up in the new child support family structure; in most cases the man has already assigned himself a quota based on past production. All the family courts need to do in most cases is make sure he doesn’t fall below this quota."

    [–]MattyAnon 38 points39 points  (8 children)

    To which she said carefully, “Well, you should.”

    We all know that's a threat to leave. Whether she'll make good on that threat I don't know, but that's the implication.

    Further implication: this is what she wants, therefore it is in her best interests. Therefore consider very very carefully if it is in yours.

    Your post is wary but positive towards marriage, but I don't get it. Why bother? You can have kids without being married. The only reason for marriage is a female-only insurance policy at your expense.

    [–]cntthnko1 9 points10 points  (0 children)

    The most a man should offer is the wedding/party itself, never actually make it a legal marriage. Why does that shit even exist? Marriage is between two people, what the fuck is up with all the other nonsense? From the government dipping their hands in to the religious ceremonies to the massive parties, it takes away from what marriage means. An agreement to allocate certain amount of time for eachother, which can be just called a relationship at that point.

    That last sentence you said... Perfect.

    [–]aptway 34 points35 points  (3 children)

    She wants marriage.

    Incorrect. She wants wedding.

    [–]CryptoManbeard 3 points4 points  (0 children)

    Girls want a wedding yes, but primarily they are looking for security. They want to be taken care of. It's genetic...

    [–]CoyoteCS 11 points12 points  (0 children)


    She wants the big wedding she was told she deserved growing up. She wants the new excitement and to show her single friends her "hubby", a.k.a the cock she took off the market.

    [–]1rp_aware[S] 1 point2 points  (2 children)

    Your post is wary but positive towards marriage, but I don't get it. Why bother? You can have kids without being married.

    Another person asked something similar. The answer:

    You can't really have kids with a woman and be unattached financially. Family law doesn't allow for that. Maybe she won't get the lump sum in divorce; but whatever she requires the courts will award to her in child support and alimony.

    [–]beginner_ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    You can't really have kids with a woman and be unattached financially. Family law doesn't allow for that. Maybe she won't get the lump sum in divorce; but whatever she requires the courts will award to her in child support and alimony.

    true but they can't give her half your wealth and half of your pension fund. All in all you will be off much better than in a real divorce. And due to that the chances of her acting up are a lot smaller already. marriage is the ticket for her to slack and get fat.

    [–]1independentmale 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    You can't really have kids with a woman and be unattached financially.

    Broke people do it all the time. They knock a bitch up and then peace out and there are few if any repercussions. I know a fool who pays $25 a month in child support out of his part time fast food job. You can't get blood from a turnip.

    At least get a prenup and keep your finances separate.

    [–]1KyfhoMyoba 18 points19 points  (2 children)

    FYI, guys, we all know that about 50% of marriages end in divorce. That pctg. goes up the lower the socio-economic strata you look at, and goes down the higher you go in socio-economic strata. In fact, when both partners have bachelor's degrees, the probability of divorce goes down to about 10%, HOWEVER, the probability of the divorce being initiated by the wife goes up to 90%. Other factors increasing the likely hood of wife-initiated divorce are age (younger=higher) and geography (urban=higher). The biggest factor indicating probability of divorce is the wife's ability to re-marry - better. Surprise, surprise - hypergamy!!

    [–]seeing-red- 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Don't forget the strong positive correlation between her past partner count and chance of divorce.

    [–]1FunAndFreedom 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Great post. Another thing to consider is how many of those marriages that don't end in divorce are terrible for the man. I would imagine 80% or more.

    [–]1Padre55 6 points7 points  (1 child)

    Would be a good time for the Morpheous/Matrix meme to be inserted.

    THIS is the reality of State "marriage" today, when one considers the "benefit" of nothing and the risk of everything the stupid trap becomes apparent.

    Literally, aside from procreation, marriage is pretty much a lose/lose for men, and it only grows worse over time.

    [–]CreateTheFuture 9 points10 points  (0 children)

    aside from procreation, marriage is pretty much a lose/lose for men

    That heinous myth cannot die fast enough. Think for a second. How does you being married benefit your children at all? My guess is you would say "it provides a stable household". The fuck it does. You can have a happy, stable, "normal" family without fucking yourself with a legal contract.

    The next objection would be "what about common law marriages?". What about them? They are beside the point. Don't fucking voluntarily sign your life away, morons. It WILL happen to you. You're not special. You're just a statistic like every other organism ever to exist.

    [–]2RedPillSafe 9 points10 points  (0 children)

    Marriage 2.0 gives an enormous advantage to women.

    So it makes sense that guys don't want to marry and women do and that we are seeing more women "take control" of deciding when to marry.

    Red Pill does not advise you to get married. Period.

    If you fold under the pressure to marry then you will fold once married.

    Your wedding will be your grave.

    [–]MGTOW_player 46 points47 points  (3 children)

    Any girl who is a true NAWALT will never try to shame or goad you into marriage.

    Never do it. If she demands a ring, run! AWALT.

    [–]CreateTheFuture 26 points27 points  (2 children)

    I hope everyone sees the irony in your use of the term "true NAWALT". It's the same as the "real unicorn" that gets mentioned around here far too often.

    A reminder to the new guys, especially: You know why we use the word "unicorn", specifically, and have a standard notation for the phrase "All Women Are Like That"? Because unicorns don't exist and all women are like that.

    Don't forget. Don't fool yourself. You haven't found the exception. You won't. Direct your life with those truths in mind.

    [–]copralalic 9 points10 points  (0 children)

    Because unicorns don't exist

    Yes they do, they just aren't what we expect.

    They are attracted to virgins, though (the only kind of guy they can reliably get).

    [–]MGTOW_player 12 points13 points  (0 children)

    Yes. That unicorn will take off that fake head piece after it has you bound by chains. Happens every time.

    [–]b0jack_horseman 5 points6 points  (0 children)

    Hey OP you should sleep well at night, knowing fully well that you've probably saved a few lives with this post :)

    [–]Lu_the_Mad 4 points5 points  (1 child)

    Eventually the girl will find some guy she is more attracted to than she is to you, and try and fuck that guy.

    At that point she will start inventing reasons to hate you.


    People who don't have things are usually bad with money. Thats why they don't have things.

    A lot of people get married because the initial lust is fading or has faded and they like the normality of their current life, so they try and do something to stay together.

    Ask her to sit down with you and plan out her future and what she will do to make herself a more successful and more valuable.

    Also ask her that if she is serious would she be willing to put away a percentage of her income in a savings account to help pay for any potential wedding related things that might come up. Say 20%. So you wont start off your new life together in debt.

    Hint: She probably wont. Or she will, and then she will spend all that money within a few months on herself.

    Personally I don't think there is anything wrong with marriage if done right. If you get someone who has a good career, makes good money, does not want to fuck your friends and is only a little crazy and that you can stand the sight of naked, hey, sure, do what you will. One day you are going to want a son, else you will have no legacy. Going hunting with your dog is fun, but one day you might want a little you and his dog to come with too. And for that you need a wife.

    But rushing into some shit because a girl wants to get married is silly.

    [–]Hideydid 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    I want to meet all these college educated virgins who will have kids with you without marriage.

    [–]Niketi 4 points5 points  (0 children)

    It's objectively foolish for a man to get married in this day and age. There is no benefit to it, only risk. I don't understand why any man would want to surrender that kind of power over himself to a woman. It seems like the most "beta" move you could possibly make.

    [–]whiskeydick2015 6 points7 points  (1 child)

    Why don't we start marrying average girls that are smart and rich? Some kissing here and there. Sex every few months while you're spinning plates behind her back as a stay at home dad.. Buy into that whole true love shit and overwhelm her with beta qualities. Divorce a few years later after being constantly beta (killing all attraction) and get your own benefit plan for a divorce that she initiates because you're too beta for her.

    [–]1KyfhoMyoba 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Smart AND rich? Jesus H Christ! Talk about looking for unicorns ...

    [–]Stevoman 5 points6 points  (2 children)

    In divorce, any increase in property that occurs after the date of marriage is split 50/50. This includes all income … any dollar saved, any asset purchased with dollars earned after the date of marriage, all investment income and capital gains, even on assets that were brought into the marriage. All increase of any kind belongs to both spouses equally.

    Simplifying a bit, this is what happens to property in a divorce: you calculate your joint net worth, each of you keeps anything you brought into the marriage – valued based on what it was worth when you got married, the lawyers take theirs, and the rest is split 50/50.

    The matrimonial home is treated differently. In spite of whoever owns it, brought it into the marriage, or made the payments – any equity in it is split 50/50.

    What you just rattled off are the laws for what is called a "community property" state. Community property is in fact a rule adopted by a minority of states. Community property laws are often criticized because they remove all the touchy-feely parts of the marital agreement and reduce it to a "business deal" where the proceeds are divided according to a formula.

    Community property is the best-case scenario you can hope for in achieving a fair division of a martial estate. Other states give the courts MUCH more flexibility in dividing things how they wish, sometimes including taking things a spouse brought to the marriage.

    [–]1independentmale 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    I live in a community property state and she still got 2/3rds out the door. Your largest assets (property, businesses) are ripe for negotiation as to their true value and you can bet your ass her lawyers will overvalue them to the point of ridiculousness. She'll get half of a number that's far higher than you could ever sell it all for.

    [–]jackbauer634 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    My ex-ex-brother-in-law (ex-husband of my ex-wife's sister) was divorced in a community property state. The ex-wife received about 65% of the assets, because he earned more and the 50/50 split was looking forward--setting both parties up for an equal lifestyle in the future. Simplified: Woman received more.

    [–]Burner1701 7 points8 points  (4 children)

    Definitely listen to everything you read here, but also remember that TRP is not made up of happily married men. There are happily married men out there, I'm one of them. Some marriages are great, not the statistical majority, but some and while the risks are great so are the rewards. If she's a nice, intelligent, girl, if her parents are still together, if she isn't a heavy drinker or drug user, if you want kids well brought up, and if you genuinely believe she values and respects you, then seriously consider marrying her. If not, then make a decision and end the relationship. If she wants marriage and you aren't going to marry her then you should let her find someone else while she's still young.

    [–]Niketi 8 points9 points  (0 children)

    It isn't so much an issue of being happily married. You can maintain a perfect relationship, but your wife still has that gun in her purse. A gun she could shoot you with on a whim at any moment. That's the problem. The balance of power in a marriage is overwhelmingly tilted in favour of women. You're completely at her mercy, trusting her not to fundamentally ruin you. You have nothing to balance the scale or to protect yourself. Only her word.

    This kind of power imbalance is not how marriages should be run, but this is what feminism has given women. I for one simply refuse to give someone else that kind of power over me - no matter how perfect they are in my eyes.

    [–]1independentmale 5 points6 points  (0 children)

    What rewards? What do you get out of a wife that you can't out of a long term girlfriend?

    I've asked many people this question and nobody can give me a straight answer. Please, do tell, what are the benefits of marriage to the man?

    [–]circlhat 1 point2 points  (1 child)

    What keeps your marriage happy? Its rare to find a happy marriage that last longer than 2 years. Could you write something up how to run a home?

    I know it sounds silly but I don't understand how to make it work without being treated like crap

    my current girlfriend did a 180 I won't go into details because I already know what to do, but all it involves is moving on, keep lifting and finding a better mate.

    I been doing this for a while and rack up over 200+ women at this point I think its me, but every damn time I try to give them the benefit of the doubt they treat me like a piece of shit and slowly but surely they cheat on me with a alpha.

    [–]bustanutmeow 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Have you gone back and had a good hard look at yourself and see what you changed?

    You need to find what you did differently and erase that from your traits.

    [–]YaBoiTibzz 2 points3 points  (10 children)

    Seems like the takeaway, as usual, is that marriage is more or less always a bad idea for males. If you can somehow be pretty fucking damn sure that your girl won't ever want a divorce, even decades down the road, then it's probably great. But in reality there's just no way to be sure of that. As this post so wisely pointed out people change over time. The woman you married might have never divorced you, but it may be a totally different woman when you've been married for 20 years, one who does consider divorce a good idea.

    It's kind of sad to read all this because I know it means that I can never have kids. Because it is more or less guaranteed that the woman will get custody in the event of a divorce, and that will result in child support payments despite me not being able to live with the kids I am supporting, it is far too much of a risk. I am not willing to put myself in danger of being fucked over that badly. It's a shame to think that starting a family is just a pipe dream in this society, but oh well.

    [–]bad_pattern3 1 point2 points  (1 child)

    why not change your strategy to fucking w/o much concern to whether you'll impregnate her or not

    and disappear if she does get pregnant

    rinse and repeat

    soon you'll have a large family all over the country. maybe the world

    let the taxes other idiots pay support your children

    and make sure you don't have much of an income officially in case a baby-mama does track you down

    it's the male mating strategy for the progressive, egalitarian world

    [–]the_real_chronos 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    As much as I'd like to raise my genetic legacy myself, it might have to come to this one day...

    [–]1H42 1 point2 points  (7 children)

    A single man can pay a fertility clinic to create a kid. Once done, the kid has only one parent on its birth certificate, the man.

    [–]MattyAnon 0 points1 point  (6 children)

    To anyone else reading this: please google "fertility clinic" and make up your own mind whether this is fact or trolling.

    [–]1H42 0 points1 point  (5 children)

    This is fact. I've posted about it here many times. California law is quite favorable to single men using fertility clinics to create a kid with only one name on the title.

    [–]MattyAnon -2 points-1 points  (4 children)

    Sperm donors do not get their name on the child's birth certificate and women do not give birth to men's children for a fee.

    If you believe otherwise, include links or other references.

    [–]1H42 2 points3 points  (2 children)


    "Surrogacy laws by country" "California is known to be a surrogacy friendly state. It permits commercial surrogacy, regularly enforces gestational surrogacy contracts, and makes it possible for all intended parents, regardless of marital status or sexual orientation, to establish their legal parentage prior to the birth and without adoption proceedings (pre-birth orders)"

    "More single men using surrogates to have kids"

    "California Fertility Partners"

    "agency 4 surrogacy solutions | Surrogacy Agency | Encino, California, USA"

    "21st-Century Babies - Building a Baby, With Few Ground Rules"

    [–]MattyAnon -1 points0 points  (1 child)

    Not a single single link to "a fertility clinic to create a kid. Once done, the kid has only one parent on its birth certificate, the man."

    We all know about surrogacy. The fertility clinic as you described does not exist. If it does, find a link to it.

    [–]1H42 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    You searched for my own paraphrased, condensed, on-the-fly abstract of the issue? Wait a day, the post will show in the Google results, lol.

    This clinic does it:

    Now examine California law on surrogacy and third party reproduction:

    Now we have arrived to the point where, if you are truly interested in single-man babymaking, you need to stop reading arguments between idiots on reddit and call a surrogacy lawyer in California to get all the details to make a fully informed decision about making a kid.

    [–]1H42 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    You have unequivocally stated:

    "Sperm donors do not get their name on the child's birth certificate and women do not give birth to men's children for a fee."

    Please provide links or other references to support your assertion.

    [–]16 Endorsed Contributorss_camaro 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    You add your salaries together and muse about the life you could afford together.

    This is just awfully dumb, regardless of what stage the relationshit has progressed to.

    [–]trpintrper 2 points3 points  (1 child)

    If you are married now evaluate your marriage. And do it fast. I got out of my marriage a year and a half in. The hamster couldn't get anything out if me. Usually alimony only sets in if you have been married for a considerable amount of time. My lawyer said over 7 years. Child support is different though. Here are some tips. Do not, I repeat. DO NOT let her take your child away from you. DO NOT leave your house, even if she demands you leave. DO NOT abuse in any sense anyone involved in this divorce such as kids and soon to be ex. DO keep a daily journal. DO record conversations, texts, emails, and anything that she might try and use against you. DO fight for your rights. DO HOLD YOUR FRAME ESPECIALLY HERE. DO NOT GIVE UP. Make sure to get a good lawyer and try to get everything done and squared away before your opposition gets a chance to do anything.

    [–]WeAreGlidingNow 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Marriage redistributes...

    I like this. As men, we can use cold, rational logic. When my marriage was starting to fail (or, from my wife's perspective, long AFTER it had failed, and her lawyer needed more time to build her case), I began using basic economics to evaluate the situation. It helps. Things like motive, incentive, supply, demand, cost/benefit, "walk-away" price, and most critically, perverse incentives.

    I tell ya, you have to set emotion aside for this. Marriage is no time for love.

    [–]TekkomanKingz 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Prenupts don't mitigate the risk if you are Donald Trump and marry Roberta the cleaning lady.

    Marry your equal.

    [–]strangelyversatile 1 point2 points  (3 children)

    My bro is engaged to a crazy bitch, she was awesome when they met - almost has me fooled. Now she's being an entitled whore and demanding our family pay for HER wedding cause hers is too poor and that's not her fault. She has him locked down for beta fuckdom. Major intervention is needed but not sure he van handle The Pill. anyone know any legit looking articles/books I could show him?

    [–]the_real_chronos 1 point2 points  (2 children)

    I don't think you can help him beyond personal advice. A man entangled within the charms of a ruinous woman is a man long far gone.

    [–]strangelyversatile 1 point2 points  (1 child)

    Appreciate you're view man, I've talked to him loads , I just don't want to see his life ruined if I can help it..

    [–]the_real_chronos 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    I know the feeling. Best you can do is be there for him when it all crumbles. Not all are wise enough to take counsel in their youth. Let the world teach him a harsh lesson, then.

    Blessings to your family and may he come to reason sooner rather than later.

    [–]1tombreck2 1 point2 points  (1 child)

    I never give much thought to marriage or divorce statistics.

    Instead I look at my married friends and they all look miserable.

    [–]1rp_aware[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    The two are related of course.

    I look at my married friends and they all look miserable.

    That is a statistic, and a correlated one: chances are that any given marriage described with the word miserable will end in divorce.

    [–]VanityKing 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    I think id rather face the death penalty for what I would do to my wife( if I had one)if she ever tried to rob half of my life's worth (or more) just because she felt like it. This is why the concept of marriage is so unappealing to men, we really don't get shit out of Marriage and for this reason I will never even consider marrying regardless of how much we click.

    [–]Diarrhoea_Shower 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Englishman here, just don't sign a marriage license if you choose to marry. There's not much in the way of common law marriage here so it's basically just cohabitation as husband and wife minus the legal bollocks and scare of divorce-rape.

    [–]DaegobahDan 1 point2 points  (3 children)

    it is quite clear that prenupts are regularly thrown out in court

    Yeah, that's not really true. Pre-nups that are thrown out are done so because either:

    A.) The law in that jurisdiction doesn't allow for pre-nups to be considered, or

    B.) The pre-nup tries to enforce a provision that is not allowed by law.

    In any other case, the pre-nup is a binding legal contract and must be respected. It's extremely rare for a prenup to be thrown out when A & B don't apply.

    [–]1rp_aware[S] 0 points1 point  (2 children)

    Correct me if I'm wrong, but there are two other ways that I have heard:

    • if she can substantiate that she signed under duress
    • if the couple's lifestyle has changed materially from what it was when the prenupt was signed (man becomes a business genius and it rains gold and Bentleys)

    [–]lukins 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    I've never heard of the second type. Can you provide a link to an example?

    [–]DaegobahDan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    The first one is easy enough to combat as long as you involve an actual lawyer in the process.

    The second one CAN happen, but it doesn't that often. Mostly because rags to riches stories like that are very rare to begin with.

    [–]evilquesadilla 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Even without considering these, marriage is supposed to be a life long and potentially difficult commitment. Men and women SHOULD get married, but only if they have overwhelming reason/desire to do so. As in, you need a good reason to get married, as opposed to the popular and cultural expectation where you need to come up with a good reason not to get married.

    [–]beginner_ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    “Well, you should.”

    It's also an opportunity to hold frame. Let's be honest how many men actually want to marry and how many of them are high-value? Wanting to marry and bind yourself to a women is already a sign of weakness or lower value. So you just say you have no interest in marriage and you will never marry. No discussion needed. These are your terms.

    She will either leave meaning you dodged a bullet or you get a power shift in your direction. You can't really loose, only if you agree to marry.

    [–][deleted]  (3 children)


      [–]1rp_aware[S] 1 point2 points  (2 children)

      Separate accounts do not afford any protection. Every dollar you contribute to "your" account is half-hers, even if you earned it. Every dollar earned (interest, gains, etc) on "your" account is half-hers, even though it's your account..

      "Your" account will be audited during the divorce process and her share will go to her.

      [–]1independentmale 1 point2 points  (1 child)

      Separate accounts do not afford any protection.

      Not true.

      Yes, she will be entitled to any money added to that account. However, you will pay her that money on your terms, only after a judge orders it so. She cannot touch it until then.

      What's the first thing a smart woman does when she's done with her marriage? She cleans out the joint accounts. It's happened to a bunch of my friends & coworkers. One guy's wife re-opened a HELOC (home equity line of credit) that he had paid off and closed months earlier. She maxed it out, walked with the cash and he's still paying on it because its attached to his home. Apparently the fine print allowed the loan to be re-opened within six months and since they were both on it, either party can open it. She also broke into his house after moving out, pushed his cheap safe out a second story window and took everything in it. He found it cracked open on the driveway when he got home from work. He called the cops but they told him since it was still legally her house (divorce wasn't final) there was nothing they could do.

      I've never seen a women held accountable for cleaning out accounts. The money is legally hers if her name is on it. By the time you get in front of a judge it's long gone.

      [–]1rp_aware[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

      That's a really good point.

      Reading through your anecdotes and others in this thread really brings it home that the person opposite you at the altar can branch into a million different potential people over time.

      [–]1R_E_D_1 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      I love your post and the thinking behind it. But this woman is not marriage material. If she truly prizes a future together she doesn't need to drag you into it.

      [–]Jonathan_Rambo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      Good stuff bro, you're even younger than me so I'm stung that much more by the potency of your words

      [–]lickguide 0 points1 point  (1 child)

      Can someone tell me how this works with de facto relationships? I'm from Australia so any local info would be appreciated.

      [–]carrgo001 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      Regarding the breakup of a de facto relationship in Australia, they are considered almost exactly the same as marriage. There are some limitations (e.g. alimony, or spousal maintenance as it's called here, can be reduced or not apply) but generally they are handled similarly. Asset allocation can be taken to the family courts if there is a dispute. However, if done correctly, prenups (officially called binding financial agreements) are completely enforceable and limit the court's ability to divide assets. For more information see

      [–]Bortasz 0 points1 point  (1 child)

      I just want add this video:

      String along method.

      [–]orchidwaterfall 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      Good post. So, how are you going to handle the situation you're in? Walk away?(hope so)

      [–]Aussify 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      5 is something I stick to very lucidly. I don't want to make any guarantees like marriage because it is a flimsy and transparent proposal nowadays.

      My sister, who is in her final semester of college, has a girlfriend she plans to marry in four years, and I worry about how well this marriage will hold up.

      [–]BetterOnTheWater 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      This whole thing is turned on its head when she is the bread winner though. In my case, she makes more. Good for me, it might neutralize the whole deal

      [–]Deaddpooll 0 points1 point  (2 children)

      The only girl worth marrying a top guy is an 18-22 yr gorgeous virgin raised in a reasonably conservative culture.

      That already disqualifies 90% of American girls.

      [–]MattyAnon 1 point2 points  (1 child)

      Where are these 10% hiding? :)

      [–]Hideydid 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      In more rural and conservative areas of the country. The girls who move to New York or Southern CA will quickly join the 90%.

      [–]Mire_Lurker -1 points0 points  (3 children)

      I don't understand the offshoot of TRP who are against getting married. It's fine as long as you do it on your terms and the woman is of quality. She should be at least 10 years younger than you. Pure (very important) and of good breeding stocks.

      I want to have a soccer team of kids you can't do that without "sealing the deal" so to speak.

      [–]LongtimeRPLurker 5 points6 points  (0 children)

      There's no "your terms". There's only the government terms.

      [–]Clemence999 0 points1 point  (1 child)

      Why not? Sign a parenting plan.

      [–]Mire_Lurker -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

      I want a traditional family unit. By my constants there is only a 10% chance of the marriage failing and with the amount of kids she'll be having it's pretty much a "sure thing" if you can believe it.