Why are these brothers who A.) don't have a woman B.) don't have any serious money, and C.) childless making threads about alimony and child support? It is highly improbable that your lifetime earnings will come within a fraction of Tiger Woods or any celebrity, so guess what? Don't worry about having to part with millions in a divorce settlement, because you'll never make millions in the first place. I've also seen a good portion of you and can extrapolate one critical thing. If and when you do get a woman, you'll both be very grateful and realize that your limited options will make it difficult to find somebody else. To recap, you're A.) not rich B.) not overwhelmingly attractive and C.) not a father, so please shut the fuck up and enjoy life. I said please.
lmao this is some funny shit equality and feminism is a joke period do you have any idea about how many women I know benefit from being paid like a man, yet still cling on to age-old traditions that a man does the physical shit like lifting, or pulling/pushing something heavy while at work? where's the equality in that?:smt043 basically you want a man's pay but don't want to do a man's job.
we can talk about the bastardization of america and the role men play in forcing a staggering amount women to raise kids alone, all because they wanted to 'bust a nut'
Indeed. The way they trash talk women, it appears all they want is a cum dumpster, not a partner. If that's the case, hiring a whore is a lot cheaper. As a friend of mine said once "You don't pay a whore for sex. You pay her to go home afterwards."
Or you can humbly go suck a dick know it all. Anytime I bring up alimony I think about the regular guy who has to shell out a thousand dollars a month to someone for the length that their shitty marriage didn't work. Can you imagine if someone told you that you had to pay 1000 dollars a month that you didn't have to some chick you didn't love anymore and then on top of that 17% of what ever is left for your kids. Negro you would shit a brick so quit acting like talking about it makes no sense. Alimony/palimony is plain wrong. No one should be held accountable for years after a marriage is over just because they did better financially than their spouse. Its ridiculous demanding that someone's lifestyle should be kept up after you're married. They don't do this for families who lose someone to death or prison so then why is maintaining their lifestyle so important afterwards. Especially if you have to split everything 50/50 anyway.
That is the LAST rep you get from Me petty....in your defense, you did not start a female bashing thread..you are just blindly following :smt048
My boyfriend pays his wife $2000.00 a month in alimony. Am I happy about it....no, but it is a package deal. He says it is worth his freedom.
I fully support that suggestion. No one, man or woman should receive life-long support from a previous partner or spouse IMO. So they provided a lifestyle that exceeds what you could have provided for yourself, if you leave it seems like common sense to me that you're going to give that up? I think you should just say a simple thank you for all the years they carried your ass and move along. If you want to maintain the lifestyle to which you've become accustomed, go work for it. Alimony was the final item of contention in my divorce. He refused to give up his claim to it, and I absolutely refused to pay it. In Oklahoma alimony is life-long if the person receiving it demonstrates that their need for that support is ongoing, and they don't remarry. So if awarded alimony I would have been sending a check every month for the remainder of his life, as there's no way he'd remarry and screw that up, and I have no doubt his 'need' for it would never change. Fortunately during our last mediation hearing we managed to get him to give up the alimony claim in lieu of other considerations, however I was fully prepared with a contingency plan should that fail. I'm generally in favor of being a law abiding citizen, however had he been awarded alimony I would have had a new name and a new address in a country with favorable banking practices before the first payment came due, I would simply disappear and I assure you he would have never received a single penny from me. I supported him for 20 years, I think that was more than generous. Being in a relationship with someone does not obligate them to support you beyond the point where that relationship ends, regardless of the reason it ended. As Vanilla suggested, not getting married is the best way to avoid alimony all together. But marriage seems to be one of those things that a lot of people want to check off of their 'To Do' list in life. So I would suggest anyone getting married have a prenup to that effect, regardless of whether you think it's necessary or whether you think you have sufficient assets to warrant that, because over time your assets may change. The argument that you don't need a prenup if you trust your partner to me is irrelevant. If they're trust worthy it won't bother them to sign one. I also know that you never truly know someone until things go south in your relationship, that can be a real eye-opener.
