Reply to Belle Burden’s “Strangers”

Forum Index » Relationship Discussion (non-explicit)

Reply to "Belle Burden’s “Strangers”"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I see this differently than a lot of other commenters and don’t necessarily judge him leaving the kids.

I was married to someone with a personality disorder and one of his favorite threats was to threaten to take the kids from me. This was despite me being the primary caregiver.

Would it be better if she was forced to lose primary custody and not see her kids half the time? I believe a child needs both parents, but there is some nuance when one parent has been the primary parent all along.

While she comes from money, she was mostly illiquid, and he was working 24-7 to support that lifestyle. I am familiar with that NY finance lifestyle and you can’t have it both ways. If you want the country house, private school and nice apartment then your husband is mostly absent unless you have generational wealthy to use. It’s not surprising he was mostly absent. I highly doubt she ever offered to return to work so he could scale back and spend time with the kids. She instead probably wanted that Colony Club membership more. Then they get divorced and it makes sense she continued on as the primary and really only true parent.

IMHO the gentlemanly thing to do wasn’t for him to leave her AND take her kids half the time while he was at it. He probably thought he was choosing the lesser of two evils.

I’ve known plenty of these NY women and they are vapid, shallow and their main priority is the lifestyle and social life. I’d be shocked if she’s not similar. [/quote]
Burden says she emptied her trusts to buy their residential properties which were jointly titled and she also contributed to their family expenses with her money. She also did pro bono work as a lawyer and has ramped it up since her divorce. All that the husband did was use her family name and connections to amass his own wealth which he protected with a prenup.[/quote]

Pro bono work and paid for homes doesn’t fund a NYC socialite lifestyle. It requires significant generational wealth or a husband at a hedge fund/private equity.

I have NY friends living similar lifestyles who are spending a million dollars a year on Nannies, vacations, private clubs, private schools etc.

Private school for two kids and the obligatory two nannies is $400k a year after tax money.

She was not funding that lifestyle. His job was. [/quote]
Well, he certainly made sure to protect his wealth with that prenup.[/quote]

Of course he did. Women like this are just looking for a husband to bankroll them. That’s part of the deal. It’s practically a business transaction. The men know it and the women know it.

Have you run in these circles? It isn’t normal. The women are after the money and even more so if they come from a wealthy background and can’t imagine a lifestyle without a Nantucket house, classic 6, weekend nanny, holiday lunch at the colony club etc. They aren’t going to marry a man who can’t provide this. Hence her overlooking his sketchy past.

I have a NY socialite friend who only spends time with her husband when socializing. They often aren’t even at the same residence. He bankrolls the lifestyle and she plans and enables a busy social calendar. It’s not a normal middle class marriage.

[/quote]
You’re just spouting ignorance about this particular book, but do carry on. [/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