If you married with someone who is better off than you, why should you be entitled to any of it?

Question

I mean, I love to hear about independence this and independence that, but when it comes to divorce...especially short lived marriage divorces...the person (usually a woman) suddenly gets dependent and claim that they should be compensated for their time.

Let me remind you I am talking about short term marriages.

Answer 1

If it was a "short term marriage" that did not produce children, and their partnership did not create new wealth that had to be divided, and no major financial transactions were made (which is unlikely), I agree with you.

But usually in marriages you share your finances to a large extent, why may include a major purchase such as a house, bonds and investments, as well as possible vehicles, furniture, entertainment goods, etc, even creating a joint bank account... in the event of a divorce the values of these assets have to be fairly allocated to both individuals, which is why both people are "entitled" to a share.  It gets even mroe complicated when there are children involved, and a parent leaves their job to stay with the kids, etc...

But if you marry just for beauty/s*x, don't you dare think it's unfair that they married just for money...

Answer 2

Life has no value (except when abused with something like slavery)

Marriage is a "Vow", "Commitment", "Covenant" which bonds the man and women together.  The men and women who get married are EQUAL but have different functions and values.  Much like the right hand and the left hand look alike, and function alike ... however, one has more talent at SOME things and the other has more talent at SOME things ... merge them and use them in harmony --- voila we have more function available to the family unit.

However, men tend to get trapped in what he has witnessed as "provider" and this can reduce his self-esteem to fausly value himself only upon his paycheck.  This does OKAY when things are OKAY ... however, should he loose his ability to provide (medical, job loss) is when we see him devalue himself, and this passes his insecurites to his spouse.  When this goes wrong the faulse assumption the man has about he's only worth his wallet ... well, the more likely he will abuse his beloved verbally/physically becasue he has low self-esteem and is cowarding to bully to remedy this.

Now most women are conditioned to place value on their talents like nurturing, looks, and charity ... but this is another topic.

Answer 3

"..compensated for their time. "

I hear this a lot. Doesn't this sound like you bought your wife?

Answer 4

I would only agree with this if that person demonstrated that they didn't have enough money to survive on their own immediately after divorce. This is why I advocate separate finances.

Answer 5

Feminist say the believe in equality, except they know that women are MUCH less inclined to marry a man with less money than her.

This is yet another example of feminist fraud.

See the Blog --- http://clearblogs.com/feministfraud

Answer 6

I'm so glad someone said this.  I think "spousal support" should be outlawed.  It's amazing how a person can sit and home smiling and doing nothing, and still get half of someone's fortune because they were married to that person.

I guess if I was married to a surgeon, I should automatically receive half of his degree and be able to perform surgery myself.

Think about it: Assuming that you slept with this person, if you want to be compensated for your "time" in the marriage, doesn't that make you a glorified w***e??

EDIT: Coach Lynne

"If a person wants to be independent they don't get married."

What are you talking about?  So if I want a career that pays me tons of money, I shouldn't pursue it if I'm married?  There's nothing wrong with being able to provide for yourself in the marriage.  You  are two adults who should be supportive of each other, and your individual selves.

As for people saying that it "depends on the person's financial situation", tough break.  Let's say I was a millionaire.  That doesn't mean that you should quit your job.  Go and work and be your own person.  The only people I should be financially obligated to are my children.

Answer 7

the whole point of marriage is the couple becomes one. If a person wants to be independent they don't get married. Both people want to have that other person as theirs through good or bad, etc. So a person has to take responsiblity for their life they can't blame the other person if they didn't do what is right for themselves why should they expect anyone else to do that.

Answer 8

Short term marriage? Well if it's short term why bother w/ it when I can just have a live-in bedroom buddy?

Answer 9

It's not only women who play this game mind you!

But I think some women include the 'dating' period.  If you were together for many years she would feel 'entitled'.  But if you were together a short while - she's a money grabbing lazy witch....  But that's just my opinion.

Answer 10

I think the whole business of ending marriages, whether you're a man or woman is quite disgusting. People are greedy and malicious. Throw in some kids and things get infinitely worse. Instead of trying to amicably ending the marriage in a way that makes both parties happy AND causes the least amount of pain, everyone wants to drag it out and not only make themselves suffer but make their friends, families and coworkers suffer as well.

Hearing divorce stories and seeing the things men and women do to each other in these situations has confirmed my belief that we are nothing but a culture of closet masochists.

Answer 11

"Short term" and "marriage" do not belong in the same sentence.   These relationships should be referred to as "spousal rentals."

If you aren't in it for the long haul, why get married at all?