Is it fair for a woman to get 50% of everything in a divorce?
- Thread starter Cath!
- Start date
Rubyfruit
ripe
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2001
- Posts
- 18,859
Wow, Cath, this seems like a really sexist question coming from a woman.
Nowadays, it's more common for both spouses to work and in a lot of cases bring home fairly equal salaries.
In my case, my husband brings home the sole income but I feel that what I do is an equal contribution to the household. He couldn't do what he does without me doing everything I do to support him.
Yes, I think property and assests acquired during the marriage should be split evenly, regardless of who brought in the most income.
Nowadays, it's more common for both spouses to work and in a lot of cases bring home fairly equal salaries.
In my case, my husband brings home the sole income but I feel that what I do is an equal contribution to the household. He couldn't do what he does without me doing everything I do to support him.
Yes, I think property and assests acquired during the marriage should be split evenly, regardless of who brought in the most income.
The Squid King
Spineless Tyrant
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2002
- Posts
- 1,080
It really depends on the individual circumstances of the divorce. Sometimes yes sometimes no. Sometimes more than 50% should be awarded.
Fly_On_Wall
Looking for the way
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2001
- Posts
- 12,842
No it's not, (and that goes for men too not just women)
why should they be intitled to half of everything
if this person sits on their ass while their partner is at work all day then desides I wan't a divorce poof half of everything plus they get ti still sitt on their ass and get alamony???
fuck that you should get what you deserve if you deserve nothing you should get nothing. now if it was an equily shared relationship then yes you are intitled to something.
why should they be intitled to half of everything
if this person sits on their ass while their partner is at work all day then desides I wan't a divorce poof half of everything plus they get ti still sitt on their ass and get alamony???
fuck that you should get what you deserve if you deserve nothing you should get nothing. now if it was an equily shared relationship then yes you are intitled to something.
SilverVeil
Cockbiting Fucktard
- Joined
- Nov 24, 2001
- Posts
- 2,560
It really depends on the situation.
How long the marriage was? What things were co-owned ?
If the marriage was less than 5 years, and the 2 people combined households before being married, then I say no. Each person should take what belonged to them before the marriage, and anything bought after the marriage should be divided if possible.
There is no how, no way, if we split up that my guy is going to let me take our PS2. But I paid for 1/2 of it. We will have to reach some sort of agreement about repaying me for my half, buying another one, or I get one of our other new consoles. He has a 37 inch TV that was his before we got together. That I feel is his no matter what. He paid for it, not me. It was already in the house when I moved in.
And he is not getting any of my comic book collection or my Bowen statues. I might consider letting him have the cat that shows his displeasure when his litter box is full by peeing on the floor though
even though the cat has been with me for 4 years.
If the people have been married for 10+ years then yes, she should get a fair share of the household items.
Just my view on it.
How long the marriage was? What things were co-owned ?
If the marriage was less than 5 years, and the 2 people combined households before being married, then I say no. Each person should take what belonged to them before the marriage, and anything bought after the marriage should be divided if possible.
There is no how, no way, if we split up that my guy is going to let me take our PS2. But I paid for 1/2 of it. We will have to reach some sort of agreement about repaying me for my half, buying another one, or I get one of our other new consoles. He has a 37 inch TV that was his before we got together. That I feel is his no matter what. He paid for it, not me. It was already in the house when I moved in.
And he is not getting any of my comic book collection or my Bowen statues. I might consider letting him have the cat that shows his displeasure when his litter box is full by peeing on the floor though
even though the cat has been with me for 4 years. If the people have been married for 10+ years then yes, she should get a fair share of the household items.
Just my view on it.
StondTmplPilot
The ICEman Cummeth!
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2001
- Posts
- 2,428
Hell yes, in my experience, I would have felt like a total ass had I squabbled over anything she wanted. She put as much or more into our marriage than I did, and she also paid for half of everything we had. In cases where the woman does not work, she still ought to get half, because it is just as much work to keep a household, as it is to earn a paycheck.
JazzManJim
On the Downbeat
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2001
- Posts
- 27,360
Hell...why is it fair still to assume than when there's a custody decision, the mom gets the upper hand?
It's just the way the courts work. There's no time for real justice, with their workloads, so they use baseline assumptions and do the best they can.
It's just the way the courts work. There's no time for real justice, with their workloads, so they use baseline assumptions and do the best they can.
Fly_On_Wall
Looking for the way
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2001
- Posts
- 12,842
Angel said:
No I don't I literaly ment someone who sits on their ass and does nothing.
the reverse is true. my mom had no job and stayed at home... but she was raiseing us 4 kids and keeping the house together my dad was never home not even when not at work
when they split up she got less then half i think she was entitled to way the hell over half.
half is rarly the proper answer.
but I udnerstand what siren said about how can the courts look and desiver whoe did what in a relationship
Sassy7
Really Experienced
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2001
- Posts
- 167
StondTmplPilot said:
Sure wish my ex would have been more like you. We divorced after 15 years of marriage and he didn't think I should get anything. He cleaned out our joint savings account and took most of the checking account when he left. I had to fight him in court just to get child support. I refused alimony, just wanted him to take care of his children. He made 3 times the income that I did and screamed and cried over every dollar he had to pay. He wound up with about 75% of our assests and I got the kids. They were the best thing I got out of the marriage. I probably could have fought him for more, but I just wanted to be free and for me & the kids to get on with our lives.
Ragingbull
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2001
- Posts
- 1,027
I can't figure out what's fair and what's not. I've been through it twice. First one was a high scholl beauty queen that enjoyed fucking her husband along with every other guy in the county. She was an idiot and didn't deserve squat, but I was a bigger idiot for marrying her (big boobs, tight ass - what more could a man ask for in a woman?) Second one was real sweet and I was the asshole (fucked our neighbor). She didn't need anything, but she deserved her half and half of my half.
Fly_On_Wall
Looking for the way
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2001
- Posts
- 12,842
lavender said:
I agree with that but some guys (me) would be willing to do the same. If when I have a family my wive asks that I stay home and do the family thing. If we both know we can live on her salary alone, i'd do it for many reasons.
but I still stick to my 50% isn't fair in that situations, especialy if the one that goes to work isn't there for the family. then it should be more.
MissTaken
Biker Chick
- Joined
- Jun 30, 2001
- Posts
- 20,570
I haven't read the thread as it is two a.m., but am happy to offer my two cents. When am I not? lol
I think that the method by which assets are split in a divorce should be individualized to situation.
Warning: Personal info...boring and mundane being offered.
In our situation, we equated our incomes. As he made more than I did, we adjusted child support to ensure that the children had the benefit of the same standard of living in both home. This fell far below the state mandate.
Re: assets
While married, he did not support the family financially except to pay half the rent and he made a third again of what I made and had no debt. He saved and hoarded his money. So, I believe I was entitle to half the assets of the marriage. In the end, I took enough of the asset money to get myself out of debt (less than 50 percent) and have a little bit in the bank. (Very little.) That decision I regret as large amount of money was spent setting up a home for the children.
So...IMHO, it SHOULD be an individualized decision, but CAN"T be because so many issues are intangible. i.e. How do you equate the networth of a state at home mom. You can't.......they are invaluable!
Fortunately for us, the issues were more concrete.
When am I not? lolI think that the method by which assets are split in a divorce should be individualized to situation.
Warning: Personal info...boring and mundane being offered.
In our situation, we equated our incomes. As he made more than I did, we adjusted child support to ensure that the children had the benefit of the same standard of living in both home. This fell far below the state mandate.
Re: assets
While married, he did not support the family financially except to pay half the rent and he made a third again of what I made and had no debt. He saved and hoarded his money. So, I believe I was entitle to half the assets of the marriage. In the end, I took enough of the asset money to get myself out of debt (less than 50 percent) and have a little bit in the bank. (Very little.) That decision I regret as large amount of money was spent setting up a home for the children.
So...IMHO, it SHOULD be an individualized decision, but CAN"T be because so many issues are intangible. i.e. How do you equate the networth of a state at home mom. You can't.......they are invaluable!
Fortunately for us, the issues were more concrete.
paganangel
born wrong
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2001
- Posts
- 18,277
i got ya prenuptual agreement...RIGHT HERE!!
hypothetical...
a multibillionaire meets a waitress. he maries her in a week. the following week he comes home and she is screwing the poolboy.(it's always the poolboy.)
how much should she get?
very simple...HALF!!!
andya know hy? 'cause that's what marriage is. he didn't have to marry her. people go into marriages without the ful understanding of what it is.
so...HALF HALF HALF.
btw,a multibillionare meets a waitress and moves her in. she lives with him and is faithful for fifty years. she raises his children, keeps the houses, cres for him through long ad painful illness, and manages the bills. after fifty years she finds a collection of pornography docmenting half a century of him screwing everything in sight.
what is she entitled to?
nothing. shoulda married him!
hypothetical...
a multibillionaire meets a waitress. he maries her in a week. the following week he comes home and she is screwing the poolboy.(it's always the poolboy.)
how much should she get?
very simple...HALF!!!
andya know hy? 'cause that's what marriage is. he didn't have to marry her. people go into marriages without the ful understanding of what it is.
so...HALF HALF HALF.
btw,a multibillionare meets a waitress and moves her in. she lives with him and is faithful for fifty years. she raises his children, keeps the houses, cres for him through long ad painful illness, and manages the bills. after fifty years she finds a collection of pornography docmenting half a century of him screwing everything in sight.
what is she entitled to?
nothing. shoulda married him!
girl
Really Really Experienced
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2001
- Posts
- 375
Re: i got ya prenuptual agreement...RIGHT HERE!!
So it's actually the little piece of paper that's the important thing, eh?
Silly me. I thought the relationship was the important thing.
girl, who constantly gets her eyes opened on this board.
paganangel said:
So it's actually the little piece of paper that's the important thing, eh?
Silly me. I thought the relationship was the important thing.
girl, who constantly gets her eyes opened on this board.
paganangel
born wrong
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2001
- Posts
- 18,277
girl
of course it's the relationship.
fact is, i'm sick of hearing mariage is just a piece of paper. if that's true, why doesn't everyone just get married? marriage means something. if she wasn't willing to mary him, well then...what else is there to say. if he was never willing to commit to her, how can she expect him to feel he owes her anything.
my point is this, people don't realize how important and sacred a marriage is b/c it's too easy to get out of. make it hard, and make it equal. if you don't, then it is just a piece of paper.
of course it's the relationship.
fact is, i'm sick of hearing mariage is just a piece of paper. if that's true, why doesn't everyone just get married? marriage means something. if she wasn't willing to mary him, well then...what else is there to say. if he was never willing to commit to her, how can she expect him to feel he owes her anything.
my point is this, people don't realize how important and sacred a marriage is b/c it's too easy to get out of. make it hard, and make it equal. if you don't, then it is just a piece of paper.
girl
Really Really Experienced
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2001
- Posts
- 375
Re: girl
I think that's presupposing that people, in general, are dishonorable and aren't willing to live up to what they say. That piece of paper is simply a legal contract between two parties saying that they won't fuck other people, won't ditch each other and will stay together forever. That's what marriage is. Marriage is the legal partnership of two people. Has nothing to do with the relationship itself. And, to me, if someone needs a legal contract in order to stick with it, then they do their mate a disservice.
Some folks know I'm getting married in about 4 months. Why am I getting married if I think it's just a piece of paper? Because, unfortunately, people who have that piece of paper are rewarded in ways that people who don't aren't. I am going to spend the rest of my life with my man. If we didn't need some of the legal 'sidebars' that come with the paper, we probably wouldn't even get married. Our commitment is to each other. The paper isn't needed for that.
Sorry for the tangent, folks.
My .02, as always,
girl
paganangel said:
I think that's presupposing that people, in general, are dishonorable and aren't willing to live up to what they say. That piece of paper is simply a legal contract between two parties saying that they won't fuck other people, won't ditch each other and will stay together forever. That's what marriage is. Marriage is the legal partnership of two people. Has nothing to do with the relationship itself. And, to me, if someone needs a legal contract in order to stick with it, then they do their mate a disservice.
Some folks know I'm getting married in about 4 months. Why am I getting married if I think it's just a piece of paper? Because, unfortunately, people who have that piece of paper are rewarded in ways that people who don't aren't. I am going to spend the rest of my life with my man. If we didn't need some of the legal 'sidebars' that come with the paper, we probably wouldn't even get married. Our commitment is to each other. The paper isn't needed for that.
Sorry for the tangent, folks.
My .02, as always,
girl
paganangel
born wrong
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2001
- Posts
- 18,277
hey that's great
really, it is. but here' the thing, and i'm NOT talking about you here or picking on you in any way. what about the idea of marriage as a public declaration? what about that ring as a signal? what about that willingness to ceate another level to the monogamous relationship? even if the legal issues were mere happenstance, those other things seem pretty important to me.
generally i'm a pretty hard hearted person. here i hate to say it, but i LIKE the idea of two people being bound to each other symbollically. i like the idea of a marriage meaning more. the start of two people ceasing to be two entirely seperate people.
"sorry boys, i can't hang today. my wife wont let me." i wish i could say those words. i'm wierd.
really, it is. but here' the thing, and i'm NOT talking about you here or picking on you in any way. what about the idea of marriage as a public declaration? what about that ring as a signal? what about that willingness to ceate another level to the monogamous relationship? even if the legal issues were mere happenstance, those other things seem pretty important to me.
generally i'm a pretty hard hearted person. here i hate to say it, but i LIKE the idea of two people being bound to each other symbollically. i like the idea of a marriage meaning more. the start of two people ceasing to be two entirely seperate people.
"sorry boys, i can't hang today. my wife wont let me." i wish i could say those words. i'm wierd.
