One person wants a prenup and the other does not

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
That's true. But not in the same way you're implying.

I'll also add that women will rant about prenups until the day fathers put the same amount of time and effort into parenting (just look at all the posts around here about how "I just didn't bond with my baby the way my wife did," "I don't know how to entertain a toddler," "I'm finally feeling like having a relationship with my child at the age of 4," "she's just so much more nurturing than I am.") All of that is bullshit. And it's prevalent. So yes, women will stop ranting about prenups when men act like more than sperm donors until it's more convenient for them to finally wake up and realize they have kids.

No kids? I don't give a crap about prenups. Sign away, but the minute you have kids all bets are off.

That's because those mothers choose shitty mates. Nothing else.

[Anonymous]

My guess is the anti-pre-nup posters have not been divorced. Because anyone who has had to go through a divorce knows how horrible it is even when it's not being litigated. It's TERRIBLE and it can easily overwhelm your life for 2, 3 years.

Even if the rate of upper middle class divorces isn't 50%, let's say it's 20% (conservative number) that's a lot. Would you invest money in a stock that had a 1 in 5 chance of going bankrupt?

EVERYONE should have a pre-nup. And pre-marital counseling. I wish I had had both.

Regarding the OP, it seems like the guy has a strong believe that both parties have a joint responsibility to be financial contributors to the marriage and that should be reflected should it fail. I think this is a perfectly reasonable position to have, though certainly not for everybody. And it's great he's getting it out there now. Kudos to him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Will he compensate you for getting pregnant? For tear and wear on your body? For tears during L&D? For nursing the baby? If you get stretchmarks, what's that worth? What about getting up with the baby, is there going to be an hourly fee or what?

Actually, the only way I would do it (assuming I had no plans for children) is to live in his house, do minimal housework and sock away all my salary. That way it amounts to free room and board. And if his income is fully his, then mine is fully mine, too. Let him contribute 100% to the house, if he wants to keep 100% of it. I will just fill up my savings account, and when I have enough, I'll peel off. That's what men like this deserve.

This is a pretty good argument for being a kept woman (and being one too.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will he compensate you for getting pregnant? For tear and wear on your body? For tears during L&D? For nursing the baby? If you get stretchmarks, what's that worth? What about getting up with the baby, is there going to be an hourly fee or what?

Actually, the only way I would do it (assuming I had no plans for children) is to live in his house, do minimal housework and sock away all my salary. That way it amounts to free room and board. And if his income is fully his, then mine is fully mine, too. Let him contribute 100% to the house, if he wants to keep 100% of it. I will just fill up my savings account, and when I have enough, I'll peel off. That's what men like this deserve.

This is a pretty good argument for being a kept woman (and being one too.)

That last part should read "and HAVING one too."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My guess is the anti-pre-nup posters have not been divorced. Because anyone who has had to go through a divorce knows how horrible it is even when it's not being litigated. It's TERRIBLE and it can easily overwhelm your life for 2, 3 years.

Even if the rate of upper middle class divorces isn't 50%, let's say it's 20% (conservative number) that's a lot. Would you invest money in a stock that had a 1 in 5 chance of going bankrupt?

EVERYONE should have a pre-nup. And pre-marital counseling. I wish I had had both.

Regarding the OP, it seems like the guy has a strong believe that both parties have a joint responsibility to be financial contributors to the marriage and that should be reflected should it fail. I think this is a perfectly reasonable position to have, though certainly not for everybody. And it's great he's getting it out there now. Kudos to him.

I get the principle of the prenup. But the terms are ridiculous. He wants an agreement that anything he makes while in the marriage is his. So if she ends up staying home with the kids then she's screwed. If she moves for his job she's screwed. If he takes out loans to start a business she is financially on the hook but if it succeeds she does not profit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
That's true. But not in the same way you're implying.

I'll also add that women will rant about prenups until the day fathers put the same amount of time and effort into parenting (just look at all the posts around here about how "I just didn't bond with my baby the way my wife did," "I don't know how to entertain a toddler," "I'm finally feeling like having a relationship with my child at the age of 4," "she's just so much more nurturing than I am.") All of that is bullshit. And it's prevalent. So yes, women will stop ranting about prenups when men act like more than sperm donors until it's more convenient for them to finally wake up and realize they have kids.

No kids? I don't give a crap about prenups. Sign away, but the minute you have kids all bets are off.

That's because those mothers choose shitty mates. Nothing else.

Nobody knows how their spouse will be as a parent until they are a parent. So just as people want to hedge their bets regarding protecting their money, they should hedge their bets regarding how they will protect any future kids. Seems fair, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a feeling OP won't post an update.

OP here. There is nothing to update, sorry. I am still thinking about it. He really isn't a jerk, at all. He isn't the least bit controlling. He is however, all about money.

I believe you. Have you talked to him about it since he first brought it up? Have things changed between you two in the last few days?
Do you have a date for the wedding?

Also, if he is all about money, why is he marrying you? Seriously, ask him. You are a student (right?) and you're planning to be a stay at home mom. You have no earning potential.

+1

If you had equal earning potential, the terms of the prenup would be a lot less problematic (though you may still wonder how compatible you are with someone so obsessed with counting every penny) because even under those terms, you'd be able to be self-sufficient in the event of divorce. But in your circumstances, you have to be pretty sure he'll never divorce you to go for the sort of thing he is proposing (or have an alternate exit strategy). You don't want to marry someone, spend years raising children and not gaining any sort of monetary security or ability to make your own way, only to be tossed to the curb broke.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will he compensate you for getting pregnant? For tear and wear on your body? For tears during L&D? For nursing the baby? If you get stretchmarks, what's that worth? What about getting up with the baby, is there going to be an hourly fee or what?

Actually, the only way I would do it (assuming I had no plans for children) is to live in his house, do minimal housework and sock away all my salary. That way it amounts to free room and board. And if his income is fully his, then mine is fully mine, too. Let him contribute 100% to the house, if he wants to keep 100% of it. I will just fill up my savings account, and when I have enough, I'll peel off. That's what men like this deserve.

I think you're on to something. Perhaps she could arrive at this compromise:
He puts all the money in the down payment, pays 100% of the mortgage, property taxes, house repairs, and utilities. Down to him paying for light bulbs when they need to be replaced. He also pays for a weekly maid service. She does no housework except laundry and the dishes. In exchange, he gets 100% of the house when they divorce.
I would have a clause in the prenup that says if he doesn't pay for the weekly maid service throughout the entire marriage he forfeits his claim on the house and it gets split 50/50 during the divorce. I would sign something like this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will he compensate you for getting pregnant? For tear and wear on your body? For tears during L&D? For nursing the baby? If you get stretchmarks, what's that worth? What about getting up with the baby, is there going to be an hourly fee or what?

Actually, the only way I would do it (assuming I had no plans for children) is to live in his house, do minimal housework and sock away all my salary. That way it amounts to free room and board. And if his income is fully his, then mine is fully mine, too. Let him contribute 100% to the house, if he wants to keep 100% of it. I will just fill up my savings account, and when I have enough, I'll peel off. That's what men like this deserve.

I think you're on to something. Perhaps she could arrive at this compromise:
He puts all the money in the down payment, pays 100% of the mortgage, property taxes, house repairs, and utilities. Down to him paying for light bulbs when they need to be replaced. He also pays for a weekly maid service. She does no housework except laundry and the dishes. In exchange, he gets 100% of the house when they divorce.
I would have a clause in the prenup that says if he doesn't pay for the weekly maid service throughout the entire marriage he forfeits his claim on the house and it gets split 50/50 during the divorce. I would sign something like this.

I think the fiance is too driven by avarice to agree to this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will he compensate you for getting pregnant? For tear and wear on your body? For tears during L&D? For nursing the baby? If you get stretchmarks, what's that worth? What about getting up with the baby, is there going to be an hourly fee or what?

Actually, the only way I would do it (assuming I had no plans for children) is to live in his house, do minimal housework and sock away all my salary. That way it amounts to free room and board. And if his income is fully his, then mine is fully mine, too. Let him contribute 100% to the house, if he wants to keep 100% of it. I will just fill up my savings account, and when I have enough, I'll peel off. That's what men like this deserve.

I think you're on to something. Perhaps she could arrive at this compromise:
He puts all the money in the down payment, pays 100% of the mortgage, property taxes, house repairs, and utilities. Down to him paying for light bulbs when they need to be replaced. He also pays for a weekly maid service. She does no housework except laundry and the dishes. In exchange, he gets 100% of the house when they divorce.
I would have a clause in the prenup that says if he doesn't pay for the weekly maid service throughout the entire marriage he forfeits his claim on the house and it gets split 50/50 during the divorce. I would sign something like this.

I think the fiance is too driven by avarice to agree to this.

This is hilarious! Most of the women who have been going nuts on this issue are motivated by avarice plain and simple.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If I ever get married, I'm buying my fiancee the biggest CZ ring she's ever seen.

Diamonds are a complete and total racket - a huge waste of money. They depreciate 60% immediately - it's worse than a new car (ever tried to sell an engagement ring?).

The trouble is that it's not just a question of the value of the diamond - it's a symbol/proxy for a lot of other stuff and a lot of women (stupidly, IMO) think it represents how much you love her and how much "tribute" you're willing to bring her - what kind of "provider" you will be. I actually think it's a counter-indicator for that, because it's such a stupid waste of money, it shows bad financial judgement. Unfortunately, it's also a signal/symbol to other women and even if your fiancee herself appreciates your attitude, she might not be too crazy about flashing that big CZ.

I talked to my fiance (now wife) about this a bit to feel her out when we were talking about marriage. She agreed, but also wasn't all "oh, yeah, bood diamonds, what a racket!". She wanted something she could show off.

I got a 1.47ct "used" diamond by buying an engagement ring from a divorced woman (<2 year marriage), for about 40% of what the same stone would have cost new. I then had it mounted in a custom platinum mount by a jewelry maker out in Seattle. The finished ring cost me about 1/2 of what getting a similar (and non-custom) ring at a regular jewelry store would have; the worst are places like Jared or Zales. I bought a big CZ job off of QVC - three 'stones" - they were freaking ginormous and quite beautiful - to do the proposal - for like a whopping $60 - while we were waiting for the ring to be made.

She's kept the CZ and on occasion will wear it for bling factor as costume jewelry (on her other hand).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If I ever get married, I'm buying my fiancee the biggest CZ ring she's ever seen.

Diamonds are a complete and total racket - a huge waste of money. They depreciate 60% immediately - it's worse than a new car (ever tried to sell an engagement ring?).

The trouble is that it's not just a question of the value of the diamond - it's a symbol/proxy for a lot of other stuff and a lot of women (stupidly, IMO) think it represents how much you love her and how much "tribute" you're willing to bring her - what kind of "provider" you will be. I actually think it's a counter-indicator for that, because it's such a stupid waste of money, it shows bad financial judgement. Unfortunately, it's also a signal/symbol to other women and even if your fiancee herself appreciates your attitude, she might not be too crazy about flashing that big CZ.

I talked to my fiance (now wife) about this a bit to feel her out when we were talking about marriage. She agreed, but also wasn't all "oh, yeah, bood diamonds, what a racket!". She wanted something she could show off.

I got a 1.47ct "used" diamond by buying an engagement ring from a divorced woman (<2 year marriage), for about 40% of what the same stone would have cost new. I then had it mounted in a custom platinum mount by a jewelry maker out in Seattle. The finished ring cost me about 1/2 of what getting a similar (and non-custom) ring at a regular jewelry store would have; the worst are places like Jared or Zales. I bought a big CZ job off of QVC - three 'stones" - they were freaking ginormous and quite beautiful - to do the proposal - for like a whopping $60 - while we were waiting for the ring to be made.

She's kept the CZ and on occasion will wear it for bling factor as costume jewelry (on her other hand).

Hijack alert! This really long post about your fiancee's ring is not at all relevant to the thread topic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hijack alert! This really long post about your fiancee's ring is not at all relevant to the thread topic.

Waaaah...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If I ever get married, I'm buying my fiancee the biggest CZ ring she's ever seen.

Diamonds are a complete and total racket - a huge waste of money. They depreciate 60% immediately - it's worse than a new car (ever tried to sell an engagement ring?).

The trouble is that it's not just a question of the value of the diamond - it's a symbol/proxy for a lot of other stuff and a lot of women (stupidly, IMO) think it represents how much you love her and how much "tribute" you're willing to bring her - what kind of "provider" you will be. I actually think it's a counter-indicator for that, because it's such a stupid waste of money, it shows bad financial judgement. Unfortunately, it's also a signal/symbol to other women and even if your fiancee herself appreciates your attitude, she might not be too crazy about flashing that big CZ.

I talked to my fiance (now wife) about this a bit to feel her out when we were talking about marriage. She agreed, but also wasn't all "oh, yeah, bood diamonds, what a racket!". She wanted something she could show off.

I got a 1.47ct "used" diamond by buying an engagement ring from a divorced woman (<2 year marriage), for about 40% of what the same stone would have cost new. I then had it mounted in a custom platinum mount by a jewelry maker out in Seattle. The finished ring cost me about 1/2 of what getting a similar (and non-custom) ring at a regular jewelry store would have; the worst are places like Jared or Zales. I bought a big CZ job off of QVC - three 'stones" - they were freaking ginormous and quite beautiful - to do the proposal - for like a whopping $60 - while we were waiting for the ring to be made.

She's kept the CZ and on occasion will wear it for bling factor as costume jewelry (on her other hand).

Hijack alert! This really long post about your fiancee's ring is not at all relevant to the thread topic.

Well this thread is 16 pages long and OP is still dragging her feet on what she's going to do about her fiance's proposed pre-nup.

- Someone munching on an almost-empty bucket of popcorn

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hijack alert! This really long post about your fiancee's ring is not at all relevant to the thread topic.

Waaaah...

Devastating comeback!