Why do women get EVERYTHING after a divorce?

Cause a lot of guys marry women that make significantly less than they do (or nothing), so the man gets screwed in a 50/50 split.

In some cases it's fair. A woman might forego a career to stay home to raise the children so the husband can focus on his career. When he dumps her to marry a 20-year old receptionist, it's reasonable for her to receive half of the assets, child support and alimony.

In my case, my ex-wife didn't do much besides spend my money so paying her alimony really sucked.

Clayton99 wrote:

The house, the money, the kids, even the damn dog.

The amount of power that women have for doing nothing seriously grinds my gears. Never getting married crew here.

Because in a legal battle the two things that matter are leverage and preparation. Most guys don't see the divorce coming and try to be nice when it does hit because they think they'll get her back one day. If you own the fact that your marriage is a failure and don't let yourself get taken advantage of, you actually do alright in divorce.

Clayton99 wrote:

The house, the money, the kids, even the damn dog.

The amount of power that women have for doing nothing seriously grinds my gears. Never getting married crew here.

This is not true. Women absolutely do NOT 'get everything' after a divorce.

I've seen instances where both women and men have played the system when it came to divorcing their respective spouses. It comes down to how good your lawyer is.

You're right- being rid of you is EVERYTHING.

wtfbbq wrote:

Clayton99 wrote:

The house, the money, the kids, even the damn dog.

The amount of power that women have for doing nothing seriously grinds my gears. Never getting married crew here.

This is not true. Women absolutely do NOT 'get everything' after a divorce.

I've seen instances where both women and men have played the system when it came to divorcing their respective spouses. It comes down to how good your lawyer is.

My understanding is that although custody disputes can become pretty nasty, financial settlements are formula driven and are usually resolved prior to going to trial.

SDSU Aztec wrote:

wtfbbq wrote:

This is not true. Women absolutely do NOT 'get everything' after a divorce.

I've seen instances where both women and men have played the system when it came to divorcing their respective spouses. It comes down to how good your lawyer is.

My understanding is that although custody disputes can become pretty nasty, financial settlements are formula driven and are usually resolved prior to going to trial.

This is generally true.

And the notion that women get everything and men get screwed over is patently false. Only the truly ignorant believe such nonsense.

The question you should be asking is why do women want to take everything while men don't. The answer is it's hard wired into their brains biologically to take things from men.

She doesn't get everything if she's dead nomsaying?

This ^ wrote:

SDSU Aztec wrote:

My understanding is that although custody disputes can become pretty nasty, financial settlements are formula driven and are usually resolved prior to going to trial.

This is generally true.

And the notion that women get everything and men get screwed over is patently false. Only the truly ignorant believe such nonsense.

Why do you have to bring up Republicans?

I've dated 4 women in a row who got screwed in their divorce.

So, it doesn't always happen the way you think.

wtfbbq wrote:

Clayton99 wrote:

The house, the money, the kids, even the damn dog.

The amount of power that women have for doing nothing seriously grinds my gears. Never getting married crew here.

This is not true. Women absolutely do NOT 'get everything' after a divorce.

I've seen instances where both women and men have played the system when it came to divorcing their respective spouses. It comes down to how good your lawyer is.

This is it, IT COMES DOWN TO HOW GOOD YOUR LAWYER IS.

Clayton99 wrote:

The house, the money, the kids, even the damn dog.

The amount of power that women have for doing nothing seriously grinds my gears. Never getting married crew here.

Because they are victims, always playing the victim card when it gets down to the nitty gritty.

Pick one .

SDSU Aztec wrote:

In some cases it's fair. A woman might forego a career to stay home to raise the children so the husband can focus on his career. When he dumps her to marry a 20-year old receptionist, it's reasonable for her to receive half of the assets, child support and alimony.

In my case, my ex-wife didn't do much besides spend my money so paying her alimony really sucked.

Maybe the court said you had to pay her but maybe you can reach her some other level.. Like send her a message saying that only a codependent little baby would need your alimony money.. just plant the seed. every time she goes to spend your money then maybe she will feel like a codependent baby.

This ^ wrote:

And the notion that women get everything and men get screwed over is patently false. Only the truly ignorant believe such nonsense.

This is thanks to the hard work of people in the Men's Rights and Fathers' rights movements in recent years. Many states used to have a rebuttable presumption that children should go with the woman and a default custody plan that gave men 80 days a year with their kids. Hopefully these two groups will continue to level the playing field as there is still much ground to cover.

Governor Rick Scott wrote:

This ^ wrote:

This is generally true.

And the notion that women get everything and men get screwed over is patently false. Only the truly ignorant believe such nonsense.

Why do you have to bring up Republicans?

Referring to Republicans as ignorant and the like worked so well for Hillary didn't it?

SDSU Aztec wrote:

In some cases it's fair. A woman might forego a career to stay home to raise the children so the husband can focus on his career. When he dumps her to marry a 20-year old receptionist, it's reasonable for her to receive half of the assets, child support and alimony.

Why is that reasonable if it was her choice to dump her career?

How much money did she have in the bank that she lost? Or are we talking about theoretical money? If she was living paycheck-to-paycheck, like 99% of people do in America, then how did she lose money if she had none to begin with? Sounds the average person would be right back where they started.

Do you think it's somehow possible to have a society where everyone's life choices are no-lose situations because there's always some other individual responsible for their "loss"?

Because women are magical and we are lucky that they even let us live on the same planet as they do.

Women don't get everything. Marriage is a financial partnership and the legal ramifications of entering into such a contract are there to protect the interests of all parties. People make sacrifices when they have kids. Some people give up parts of themselves for the good of the unit. In traditional cases (ie those without a prenuptial agreement), the household is divided 50/50 (at least those assets accrued during the term of the marriage) unless there is a prenup or unless people file separately and do not intermingle their funds. If there are kids involved, the court will act to protect the interests of the kids (no you cannot financially abandon your kids in a divorce). The lower earning spouse will typically be brought up to 40% of the household income for 40% of the term of the marriage unless someone remarries. The courts are very typically very fair in this respect. It is a financial partnership, don't be ignorant enough to marry strictly out of love (which is really just lust).