Reply With Quote
I wondered the same thing, so I did a search and found this https://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=100054. Not too many comments, but the ones there seemed a bit "gleeful"Guys, what about women that have to pay alimony?Is that ok?
Nice to know there is at least ONE smart woman here.I have to agree with you, alimony to me is like you're still renting an apartment you can't live in.
I wondered the same thing, so I did a search and found this https://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=100054. Not too many comments, but the ones there seemed a bit "gleeful"Guys, what about women that have to pay alimony?
Nah he just es like a woman ...
So now that you have a bad taste of marriage in your mouth, would you consider getting married again?
Thanks for researching.I wondered the same thing, so I did a search and found this https://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=100054. Not too many comments, but the ones there seemed a bit "gleeful"
Nah, he actually has a legit reason.Nah he just es like a woman ...
She deserves half and I seldom say that. They have been married for almost 30 years and they have like 6 kids togethers.
to the no. My stance is and has always been if I got divorced, I'd never get married again. I feel that marriage is unnecessary. Two people can have a happy, successful relationship without it. I know people who have been in long standing relationships, both with kids and without, who are not only happy, but see no reason to make it state sanctioned. With divorce rates around 50% (higher in some areas), it just makes little to no sense to me.So now that you have a bad taste of marriage in your mouth, would you consider getting married again?
Any relationship I have with a woman from here on out will be on the basis that marriage is not in the cards. If a woman can't handle that, I understand.
On the basis of what? What did she bring to the marriage financially? Just because they were married for a long time? Find me some proof that she earned that much of the marital assets and I'll agree.
If you felt marriage was unncessary, why did you marry to begin with?
I support this, especially if there are no kids.
You seem to be greatly outnumbered. What's wrong? Did some mean boy put sand in your cooter?Nah he just es like a woman ...
I think alimony is usually a bunch of , but it has its place in some situations. If a woman was a stay at home mom for years and raised children that have grown up and are no longer eligible for child support, and she gets divorced ... that woman should get alimony, for at least a certain amount of time. Because she spent all of those years away from the work force, the odds of her getting even a halfway decent job are , and she at least deserves some start-up support to get back into school, etc. etc. It's for situations like these that alimony exists, but of course some people take advantage of the situation.
I didn't feel that way at the time. I was 22 when I married. I was young and naive. I didn't know . After seeing so many friends get married and divorced in the last 8 years and seeing all the turmoil they had to endure as a direct result of getting married, my feelings on the matter changed. Trust me, I didn't go about this decision lightly. I tried for a long time to make the marriage work. It took a few years before I finally realized my marriage was unrepairable. And once I realized it, I no longer cared. Once I no longer cared, I instantly felt more relaxed and had more peace of mind in my decision to end it.
My divorce isn't even final and I already feel happier than I have in a long time.
I was just wondering when your opinion of marriage changed, before or after.
Good luck though......sounds like you are making the right decision for YOU.
If I marry a rich chick and it doesn't work, all I want back is my own and the divorce signature. I don't care if I lived like a millionaire before with her; no way would I be en led to keep living like that off her support just because we were once in love.Guys, what about women that have to pay alimony?
I disagree. Here's an example. My mother and father married in '69. My three older siblings are hers from previous marriages. Before they met, she raised them while putting herself through school AND working. (no spousal or child support and no welfare.) When my parents married she could have quit her job as a nurse because financially it wasn't necessary. She kept working to not only better provide for the family, she also wanted to retain her marketable skills in case my parents divorced. Through hard work they have been happily married for nearly 40 years. If my parents divorced tomorrow, she would be financially stable without alimony because she made a responsible choice to not depend on my father for everything.
Ok, my mom is an exception to the rule, fine. But it can be done. If you choose to be a stay at home parent/spouse with no motivation to acquire marketable skills, you take the risk of digging your own grave. I don't know if that is Mrs. Gibson and I won't make presumptions. But if he earned ALL the money or most of it, he should be en led to keep what he earned minus child support.
But what if your husband wants you to be at home with the kids? Some men want that in a wife- someone who will be home for the kids when they the finish the school day and someone who will be there when he ( the husband) comes home from work.
My dad did.
Excellent point. If you (as a woman) want to be a working parent but your husband doesn't and refuses to budge, you shouldn't bend to the will of your husband. If you can't find a compromise, you don't belong together.
My parents worked alternate shifts for years (one working days, one working nights) so that someone would always be home for the children until they were old enough to be at home without supervision which in my house, wasn't until age 15. My parents made it work.
Any relationship, whether it be a marriage or not, is a partnership, not one person lording over the other. I don't mean to say anything derogatory towards your parents, I'm making a broad generalization.
Last edited by Strike; 04-15-2009 at 02:51 PM.
Well I meant it more in regards to alimony. If a wife and her husband agree that she should stay at home with the kids- that that is what they both want for their marriage, then the wife is not shrinking from working but rather is pursuing a different sort of active ( though unpaid) employment.
I think those woman deserve alimony. They fulfilled their end of the maritial contract and should not be forced to start again penniless.
You can't really say that choosing to stay home with your kids equals no motivation to acquire marketable skills. When I married I made $70k per year. When we had kids, we made a joint conscious decision that I would stay home because we both strongly valued that kind of child rearing. It's worked out fine financially ---but bottom line is I did give up something to get here. Am I en led to anything besides child support? Just curious.
If they both agree to that lifestyle, so be it. But I maintain that any spouse to chooses to completely depend on their spouse financially and makes no attempt to learn or acquire any knowledge or skills that can be used to support themselves in the event of a divorce shouldn't be en led to anything except child support. If you don't qualify for child support, too bad.
If you married a millionaire your ass would be forced to sign a prenup
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
