(mark_sobolewski{at}yahoo.com) writes:
> Andre Lieven wrote:
>> Mark Sobolewski (mark_sobolewski{at}yahoo.com) writes:
>
>> > Agreed.  You wouldn't be perfectly safe but she would
>> > think twice before moving against you, eh?  If you've
>> > moved the assets properly into a trust then they
>> > are largely untouchable.  I kid you not. OJ did something
>> > similar.  You don't think he goes golfing all day
>> > on his Social Security, do you?
>>
>> Well, he had far greater resources with which to get the top
>> level legal help. Given the things that I've heard about the
>> nearly routine ways that courts overturn prenups, I'm not
>> sanguine about them proving much cover for a person without
>> the resources for a half decade legal fight.
>
> The key here is that such a person would have resources:
> A ton of money in a swiss account (and moved out of it
> in a quick hurry should legal measures be taken) and
> the property in a trust that would take a month or
> two of legal proceedings to even know what's going on.

Well, when dealing with folks whose pay tends to go to current
operational spending, like mortgages and the like, there might
not be a lot to send overseas. Or, to incorporate one's self,
in support of that.

One law for the rich, and another for the not-rich.

> So safe?  Agreed, nothing is safe in family court, but
> the key is that she won't be as quickly motivated to
> move against him for trivial reasons.  After all, all
> he's doing is trying to protect himself.

Might such a woman pick through his records, when he's at work,
to get evidence of the moved off shore loot ? Could be...

>> >> > Yes, it sounds pretty incredible, doesn't it?  Especially
>> >> > when these women CRAVED men to take them out
>> >> > and pay for dinner.  But that's just it: As long as the man
>> >> > handles the money, even if they earn it, they get
>> >> > their "feelings" of traditionalism
satisfied.  On the contrary,
>> >> > a man putting them in their place probably makes
>> >> > them happy more than anything...
>> >>
>> >> Indeed. Many modern women cannot respect a man that they can
>> >> get, and cannot get any man they might be able to respect.
>> >> Ergo, settling. Ergo, many divorces, 70+% chosen by the women.
>> >
>> > I talked with such a woman who had divorced her husband
>> > and he turned out to be everything women would want:
>> > Good looking, good income, etc.
>>
>> But, she just didn't.... feeeyylll the love, any more.
>>
>> Its amazing how common this is, among modern women. Dr
>> Phil, last year, IIRC, did a show on this, and one wife,
>> in her later 20s, or early 30s, complained that married
>> life wasn't like dating. Phil asked her, did she expect
>> dinners out every week, flowers every week, and all that,
>> and she said " Yes ! " in a way that made clear that she
>> could not concieve of a guy not chasing after her, 24/7/365.
>
> I always hold my wife's hand when going out or give her
> my arm and say hello to her before coming home and
> surprise her with little things I think she'll appreciate.
> It wasn't about spending money.

Sure: But you and I have rather... uncommon women. Ones
who reject the brain rot of Feminism. So, they appreciate
their men, and their men do them.

> The problem is that American women aren't trained on how
> to make men think of doing these things for them other
> than emotional blackmail.  Be a good doggie, and you'll
> get sex.  The problem is that this treat doesn't work when
> the doggie now has a bowl of it overflowing everyday.

Indeed, and thats the catalyst of the marriage strike.
See M. Dowd, NYTimes.

>> > I suspect that the spinster syndrome for such women is
>> > probably due more to the women's personality turning
>> > men off in general than just about them being
>> > too fussy (although that doesn't help matters.)
>>
>> I'd suspect that both factors are involved. Men tend
>> to get along better than women do. So, men aren't as
>> picky about a lot of things, and about *people*, once
>> core value areas are covered. Things need to be good,
>> but not always perfect, with us.
>>
>> But, how could you sell thousands of dollars of make
>> up, and house cleaning gear, to people so not picky ?
>> Thats why it's women's media that drives the women
>> makeover industry. If anyone were to ask average men
>> if they wanted their women so obsessed with that
>> stuff, I'll bet that the vast majority would say " no ".
>
> I nearly barfed when my wife shared the obsession
> that Carrie has with shoes in "Sex and the City".

Oh my. Mine has seen the show, and even though she is a
woman who appreciates a wide ranging collection of footware,
the idea of $475US Manolo Blaniks didn't do it for her.

> I told her I don't look at a woman's foot and if I do,
> I don't know the difference between cheap italian
> shoes she picks up at the clearance store and the ones
> being sold in boutiques.

Exactly. Women who load up on ultra expensive footware
are surely not doing it for their men, as most of their
men simply don't... care.

> Funny thing I just thought of: Many of these career
> women are slobs because, like us, they don't have a lot
> of spare time to fru-fru over themselves and worry
> about vacumming the house every 10 seconds.  The ability
> for women to obsess over crap is something that
> Patriarchal tyrants such as me give them.



> Back to the clock tickers: I imagine that a career
> woman who suddenly finds that a man has taken power
> in her life as I specified above, and at the same time,
> gives her the "freedom" to put more attention into
> feminine things that she long wanted to look into would
> become amazingly happy.

Indeed. Its clear that the present state of " equality "
has most such women frazzled and pissy. So, thats surely
not the way to go, for them.

Insanity is the repeated attempts at a method that has
never worked. By that definition, such women are...
insane.

Proof: Aggy. 

Andre

--
" I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess. "
                                    The Man Prayer, Red Green.


--- UseNet To RIME Gateway {at} 3/1/05 5:34:38 PM ---