Reply to DH says his success is my success

Forum Index » Relationship Discussion (non-explicit)

Reply to "DH says his success is my success "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Just make sure you know where all the money is and how to access the accounts, and that you have access to sufficient funds to pay a very good lawyer up front should you ever are faced with your DH's idea of success has changed to include dumping the old for a new model. [/quote]

This is so unnecessary, and your jealously is showing. [/quote]

I'm not jealous, and it is necessary.[b] I know that from decades of experience advocating for women and children in divorce and domestic violence situations[/b] where the entire world was pulled out from under them when husband decided to trade younger or sexier or whatever stupid reason he had.

It's ignorant to suggest that a woman in 2024 shouldn't be concerned about knowing the finances of her household and marriage and have at least in the back of her mind a plan in place to take care of herself, and any children who are still minors or subject to education support.

Poster you seem to have the naive view that a woman can assume her husband is good and faithful and always will be. I've seen firsthand hundreds and hundreds of times how a man can go from loving husband to cruel philanderer who wants to strip his children and their mother of as much financial support as he can get away with.

Always be prepared.[/quote]

How many of these victims were white women with graduate degrees, substantial house hold savings, and didn’t have their first child until they were married and over the age of 30?  My guess is very few.  [/quote]

Ha ha!

Wrong.

[b]Are you seriously not aware of the lucrative dissolution practices where lawyers focus full time on high income couples divorcing?[/b] The rate may be lower overall, but those folks DO divorce and the type of personalities involved and the amount of money to burn often means years-long high conflict divorces with huge billing to attorneys on all sides.

And yes, plenty of wealthy men control and beat their wives - sorry to burst elitist bubbles.

[/quote]

Yes and imagine how much more fulfilling one’s life would be with a career like THAT versus an adoring spouse who makes millions of dollars!!

Rather than waste you life enjoying your own family you could have the ultimate satisfaction of helping to destroy OTHER families for money!!![/quote]

I don't drive high conflict litigation, I advocate for abused women and children. I feel very satisfied with the work I've done over the years because it has substantially bettered people's lives at a time when they were very vulnerable and desperately in need of an ally - a time when their families had been destroyed by a cheating partner, or a partner with a raging substance use disorder, or a partner who had engaged in financial infidelity, and had done so while cruelly emotionally and/or physically abusing his wife and/or kids.

I didn't destroy families - I helped hurt people be safe and somewhat secure after a beast ripped through their lives. [/quote]

Sure, you “helped” them by dragging on their divorce proceedings for YEARS to keep those huge attorney fees rolling in (your words).

LMAO at you trying to pretend you’re some kind of altruistic do-gooder.  Get real.[/quote]

You’re a moron.

I was an advocate for abused women and children - not a high conflict, high income divorce attorney.

I can be something else and still have the ability to observe what is going on in divorce courts.

Lots of savage divorces at all income levels and yes, because abuse happens at high income levels too, some of the women and children I advocated for came from a high income setting - at least until she woke up one day and found her accounts empty, her credit cards shut off and no way to support herself and her kids without acquiescing to his abusive demands.[/quote]

You are the one who brought up high conflict divorce attorneys, which was the career path I referenced in the initial reply (that’s why it was bolded).  Then you got incredibly defensive, [b]implying [/b]that this was YOUR career path - but now you’re saying it’s not what you do, so why did you argue with the initial reply to begin with?  Your reply to my reply was a complete non-sequitur, and yet you are calling ME a moron…

So many women on this thread can’t comprehend what they read or even follow along in conversations in which they are one of two or three total participants.  If this is the energy and intelligence that you are bringing to your various high-powered careers then it is no wonder that our society continues to deteriorate.[/quote]

I NEVER said I was a high conflict high income divorce attorney - I said right from the start that I was an advocate for abused women and children in divorce and domestic violence situations.

As for everything else you said - oh to have the confidence of a mediocre man.  :roll: [/quote]

Congratulations.  You don’t know what the verb “to imply” means, either.  Seriously, you are REALLY struggling to keep up in this conversation.  It’s kind of sad.[/quote]

DP but it's high key hilarious that the person who said to a DV advocate "rich white women never experience DV or get hosed in divorce" decided that[b] the DV advocate's response mentioning expensive divorce lawyers[/b] was the poster's roundabout way of declaring herself not a DV advocate but rather an expensive divorce lawyer . . . has no idea he's the one not following the thread well.  [/quote]

Incorrect.  The initial response to the bolded was that expensive divorce lawyers destroy families, to which the DV advocate defensively responded that SHE doesn’t destroy families, implying that SHE is an expensive divorce lawyer… because otherwise why on Earth would she respond to defend HER career to a post that was not about HER career.

It’s low key not hilarious how illiterate some of you are.[/quote]

Loud and wrong, and more ridiculous by the post.  She literally said twice in the post that she was not a litigator but you can't read and think that makes you intuitive.  Stay on brand, dude!  Be louder and wronger in the next response.[/quote]

You’re starting with the wrong post, idiot.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics