Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote: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.
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.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:She alludes to his leaving just as he made it really big time in his career, so it looks like he had been quietly planning and placed the cherry on top with an exit affair.
I’m looking forward to getting off the library waitlist for this book. I might have to buy it.
My STBX did the same thing. I assume our finances involve fewer zeros but it was the same kind of timing and carefully planned around a promotion and stock grants.
Anonymous wrote: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.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:She's on the modern love podcast today.
No gift links left: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/14/podcasts/belle-burden-husband-strangers.html?smid=url-share
online, there's a little blurb that says:
When reached for comment about Ms. Burden’s recollections relating to their divorce and custody of their children, Ms. Burden’s ex-husband provided the following response:
“While I disagree with many of her recollections, as well as her overall mischaracterization of my relationship with my children, I do not wish to comment in more detail in order to protect them from further violations of their privacy other than to say that I continue to lovingly support, and be lovingly supported by, my children.”
Yeah. That's a lie. Perhaps one he believes himself.
You don't know that. None of us do.
He would have easy evidence to the contrary if it existed in the form of legal documents, and his lawyers would have produced it prior to the book being published, since he knew she was going to say that.
Why? Seems like he doesn’t want to air his dirty laundry. A public fight is low class. She obviously needs the money or has a screw loose for the book.
Anonymous wrote: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.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:She's on the modern love podcast today.
No gift links left: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/14/podcasts/belle-burden-husband-strangers.html?smid=url-share
online, there's a little blurb that says:
When reached for comment about Ms. Burden’s recollections relating to their divorce and custody of their children, Ms. Burden’s ex-husband provided the following response:
“While I disagree with many of her recollections, as well as her overall mischaracterization of my relationship with my children, I do not wish to comment in more detail in order to protect them from further violations of their privacy other than to say that I continue to lovingly support, and be lovingly supported by, my children.”
My brother has a high level finance job in NYC and a shocking number of men do the CTRL-ALT-DEL on their former lives once they hit their 50s. Not surprised this man’s “recollections” differ.
Anonymous wrote:Yall have your head in the sand if you think dad's don't leave their kids the majority of the time.
My friend is a divorce lawyer and her favorite move is acting like they will force 50/50 custody and watching men admit they don't really want the kid in front of the judge.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:She's on the modern love podcast today.
No gift links left: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/14/podcasts/belle-burden-husband-strangers.html?smid=url-share
online, there's a little blurb that says:
When reached for comment about Ms. Burden’s recollections relating to their divorce and custody of their children, Ms. Burden’s ex-husband provided the following response:
“While I disagree with many of her recollections, as well as her overall mischaracterization of my relationship with my children, I do not wish to comment in more detail in order to protect them from further violations of their privacy other than to say that I continue to lovingly support, and be lovingly supported by, my children.”
Yeah. That's a lie. Perhaps one he believes himself.
You don't know that. None of us do.
He would have easy evidence to the contrary if it existed in the form of legal documents, and his lawyers would have produced it prior to the book being published, since he knew she was going to say that.
Anonymous wrote:My STBX is not a gazillionaire and believes all sorts of things about himself and the kids’ feelings about his behavior. I can only imagine how insufferable he would be with access to a press release and a ton of money. These guys really believe their own bullsh-t, which makes sense because otherwise how could you get through a single day without dying from shame?