Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos is getting divorced - Girlfriend's brother evidently sold the story to media - Page 10

Site Notices

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos is getting divorced - Girlfriend's brother evidently sold the story to media (Page 10 of 14)

Posted: 1/11/2019 10:34:43 AM EDT

[#1]

I always wondered what a piece of tail worth billions looked like.

Posted: 1/11/2019 10:47:03 AM EDT

[#2]

Sources close to the investigation say Sanchez sent the sexts to a friend to show off about her relationship with the world’s richest man — and then the pal slipped the texts to the Enquirer.

“Lauren’s over the moon [about their relationship],” said a source. Link

Posted: 1/11/2019 10:52:50 AM EDT

[#3]

Quote History

Quoted:

Sources close to the investigation say Sanchez sent the sexts to a friend to show off about her relationship with the world's richest man and then the pal slipped the texts to the Enquirer.

"Lauren's over the moon [about their relationship]," said a source. Link

View Quote

Loose lips? Probably due to some type of exercise she's doing with those lips.

Posted: 1/11/2019 11:39:11 AM EDT

[#4]

Quote History

Quoted:
I've heard the same arguement made in justification for alimony.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:

Marrying someone doesn't make you their equal. You can marry up or down. Bezos is the Super Bowl champion of business. How much did she really contribute to that? Compensate her for what she actually contributed. Not some default "I want half, plus spousal support for life" BS.

True equality would mean nobody would ever pay spousal support again.

No offense but I'm sensing a bit of bias in your posts.

I am biased. I believe the divorce industry and family court system treat men and breadwinners unfairly.

Then you are arguing based on feels, not logic.

Stay at home parenting/spouse is rarely a unilateral decision, and no few men specifically desire to have a stay at home spouse. If a divorce happens, their obligations are commensurate with their share in that decision.

Yes, the stay at home can get a job. But not nearly as good a job as if they’d spent those years building their career rather than caring for hearth and home.

This, again.

This is the narrative I've seen here:

She could have a career, but women who focus on careers are not "good wife material." "Why can't she be happy staying home and raising my kids?" they opine. No, daycare is no good. They don't want some strangers taking care of the kids so the wife can continue her career. They want the mother to be at home!

But when there's a divorce, it's like, "She shouldn't get half of what I EARNED and she did NOTHING!!!"

Either having kids raised by their mom is worth something, or it isn't. If it isn't, don't bitch when she puts the kids in daycare and doesn't miss a day of work so she can aggressively build her career over the years. If it's worth something, then don't bitch when you get a divorce (again, assuming she wasn't cheating or being a horrible wife) and she ends up getting her "share."

I've heard the same arguement made in justification for alimony.

In another thread, Bushboar (our resident divorce lawyer) is saying that sometimes alimony is justified (but awarded too often). I'm waiting to read what he means by that.

But I wasn't thinking of alimony per se (nor was I not thinking of it) but more...is her staying home with the kids and keeping the home (to avoid having the kids in daycare) worth something, or isn't it? If it's neither here nor there and makes absolutely no difference, then ALL mothers should have fulltime careers and the kids should always be in daycare.

Funny, I read a lot of comments from guys here where they lament that not enough women are happy being at home taking care of the family. So is her staying at home and being more family/kids/home-focused a good thing, or just her being a worthless leech who contributes nothing?

Posted: 1/11/2019 11:47:55 AM EDT

[#5]

Quote History

Quoted:

In my experience, it's been the absolute refusal to work from the woman so she can "tend the home", meanwhile he comes home from work with the house dirty, no food, money spent, and the kid with her mom.
9 times out of 10 here in the south, it's what I've witnessed. They say that's the culture and want to not work while also being a strong woman and not doing housework because "feminism".

View Quote

Some see being a stay at home spouse as a sacrifice. I see it as early retirement. I would love to just lift, hike and shoot all day while someone else provided everything I needed and more.

Posted: 1/11/2019 11:50:37 AM EDT

[#6]

Quote History

Quoted:
In another thread, Bushboar (our resident divorce lawyer) is saying that sometimes alimony is justified (but awarded too often). I'm waiting to read what he means by that.

But I wasn't thinking of alimony per se (nor was I not thinking of it) but more...is her staying home with the kids and keeping the home (to avoid having the kids in daycare) worth something, or isn't it? If it's neither here nor there and makes absolutely no difference, then ALL mothers should have fulltime careers and the kids should always be in daycare.

Funny, I read a lot of comments from guys here where they lament that not enough women are happy being at home taking care of the family. So is her staying at home and being more family/kids/home-focused a good thing, or just her being a worthless leech who contributes nothing?

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:

Marrying someone doesn't make you their equal. You can marry up or down. Bezos is the Super Bowl champion of business. How much did she really contribute to that? Compensate her for what she actually contributed. Not some default "I want half, plus spousal support for life" BS.

True equality would mean nobody would ever pay spousal support again.

No offense but I'm sensing a bit of bias in your posts.

I am biased. I believe the divorce industry and family court system treat men and breadwinners unfairly.

Then you are arguing based on feels, not logic.

Stay at home parenting/spouse is rarely a unilateral decision, and no few men specifically desire to have a stay at home spouse. If a divorce happens, their obligations are commensurate with their share in that decision.

Yes, the stay at home can get a job. But not nearly as good a job as if they’d spent those years building their career rather than caring for hearth and home.

This, again.

This is the narrative I've seen here:

She could have a career, but women who focus on careers are not "good wife material." "Why can't she be happy staying home and raising my kids?" they opine. No, daycare is no good. They don't want some strangers taking care of the kids so the wife can continue her career. They want the mother to be at home!

But when there's a divorce, it's like, "She shouldn't get half of what I EARNED and she did NOTHING!!!"

Either having kids raised by their mom is worth something, or it isn't. If it isn't, don't bitch when she puts the kids in daycare and doesn't miss a day of work so she can aggressively build her career over the years. If it's worth something, then don't bitch when you get a divorce (again, assuming she wasn't cheating or being a horrible wife) and she ends up getting her "share."

I've heard the same arguement made in justification for alimony.

In another thread, Bushboar (our resident divorce lawyer) is saying that sometimes alimony is justified (but awarded too often). I'm waiting to read what he means by that.

But I wasn't thinking of alimony per se (nor was I not thinking of it) but more...is her staying home with the kids and keeping the home (to avoid having the kids in daycare) worth something, or isn't it? If it's neither here nor there and makes absolutely no difference, then ALL mothers should have fulltime careers and the kids should always be in daycare.

Funny, I read a lot of comments from guys here where they lament that not enough women are happy being at home taking care of the family. So is her staying at home and being more family/kids/home-focused a good thing, or just her being a worthless leech who contributes nothing?

That is Bushboar's personal opinion on alimony, not legal opinion. There is a difference.

Posted: 1/11/2019 11:51:12 AM EDT

[#7]

Quote History

Quoted:

In another thread, Bushboar (our resident divorce lawyer) is saying that sometimes alimony is justified (but awarded too often). I'm waiting to read what he means by that.

But I wasn't thinking of alimony per se (nor was I not thinking of it) but more...is her staying home with the kids and keeping the home (to avoid having the kids in daycare) worth something, or isn't it?

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

In another thread, Bushboar (our resident divorce lawyer) is saying that sometimes alimony is justified (but awarded too often). I'm waiting to read what he means by that.

But I wasn't thinking of alimony per se (nor was I not thinking of it) but more...is her staying home with the kids and keeping the home (to avoid having the kids in daycare) worth something, or isn't it?

Its definitely worth something. Especially if he wanted kids. Less so if she brow beat him into having kids.

If it's neither here nor there and makes absolutely no difference, then ALL mothers should have fulltime careers and the kids should always be in daycare.

Funny, I read a lot of comments from guys here where they lament that not enough women are happy being at home taking care of the family. So is her staying at home and being more family/kids/home-focused a good thing, or just her being a worthless leech who contributes nothing?

It can be both at different times. Being a stay at home spouse is a gift given by the breadwinner to the stay at home spouse. If the marriage fails, its time to step up and take care of yourself. Refusing to do so makes you a parasite.

Posted: 1/11/2019 11:54:48 AM EDT

[#8]

Quote History

Quoted:

That is Bushboar's personal opinion on alimony, not legal opinion. There is a difference.

View Quote

But I'm curious to know the reason why he believes this. This is his living and I'll bet he knows stuff the rest of us don't and sees things the rest of us don't see.

Posted: 1/11/2019 12:03:44 PM EDT

[#9]

Didn't read all 10 pages, but has anyone mentioned that his new lady is 49?

Older than his wife!

That liberal cocksucker is doing it wrong.

Posted: 1/11/2019 12:04:21 PM EDT

[#10]

Sounds like Bezos' girlfriend has lawyered up. I don't see how she's going to get a windfall from this divorce.
https://radaronline.com/exclusives/2019/01/bezos-mistress-using-power-divorce-lawyer-wants-mediation-with-cuckold-talent-agent-hubby/

Posted: 1/11/2019 12:11:17 PM EDT

[#11]

Quote History

Quoted:
Its definitely worth something. Especially if he wanted kids. Less so if she brow beat him into having kids.

It can be both at different times. Being a stay at home spouse is a gift given by the breadwinner to the stay at home spouse. If the marriage fails, its time to step up and take care of yourself. Refusing to do so makes you a parasite.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:

In another thread, Bushboar (our resident divorce lawyer) is saying that sometimes alimony is justified (but awarded too often). I'm waiting to read what he means by that.

But I wasn't thinking of alimony per se (nor was I not thinking of it) but more...is her staying home with the kids and keeping the home (to avoid having the kids in daycare) worth something, or isn't it?

Its definitely worth something. Especially if he wanted kids. Less so if she brow beat him into having kids.

If it's neither here nor there and makes absolutely no difference, then ALL mothers should have fulltime careers and the kids should always be in daycare.

Funny, I read a lot of comments from guys here where they lament that not enough women are happy being at home taking care of the family. So is her staying at home and being more family/kids/home-focused a good thing, or just her being a worthless leech who contributes nothing?

It can be both at different times. Being a stay at home spouse is a gift given by the breadwinner to the stay at home spouse. If the marriage fails, its time to step up and take care of yourself. Refusing to do so makes you a parasite.

I wouldn't say that the breadwinner is just "gifting" the stay at home spouse with the ability to stay home. That's just your spin on it. The breadwinner has a career that is intact and presumably advancing, and the stay at home spouse has limited or "fallen behind" on their career because they were out of the workplace for a long period of time. The stay at home spouse has gifted the breadwinner spouse with the opportunity to keep working with no interruption. I mean, I assume that both spouses want the kids to be well taken care of and have agreed on who should stay home in order to do that.

I've heard many guys basically shrug their shoulders and say, "Tough shit" if the stay at home spouse has a shitty career after a divorce. So what? That was their choice.

If that's the case, neither spouse should ever miss a day of work. And I'll add, they shouldn't cut their hours, shouldn't forgo out of town business trips, shouldn't miss overtime, shouldn't have a lower-paying job (which has more flexible hours to accommodate picking the kid up from school or taking them to appointments) either. Split the duties 50/50. Otherwise, the spouse who makes more concessions or downgrades their career (or just doesn't have one anymore in order to take care of the kids) has damaged their earning potential. When the other spouse then responds like, "tough shit for you"? Screw that. Obviously, the stay at home spouse's contribution was worthless and they should have never done it to begin with.

Posted: 1/11/2019 12:12:10 PM EDT

[#12]

Maybe It's just me but I find his wife in that red long dress more attractive than Sanchez.

If he doesn't lose 30-50% of his assets, I'll be surprised.

Posted: 1/11/2019 12:14:36 PM EDT

[#13]

Quote History

Quoted:
In before "screen name?"

View Quote

I thought it would be painfully obvious at this point.

Posted: 1/11/2019 12:14:42 PM EDT

[#14]

Quote History

Quoted:
I wouldn't say that the breadwinner is just "gifting" the stay at home spouse with the ability to stay home. That's just your spin on it. The breadwinner has a career that is intact and presumably advancing, and the stay at home spouse has limited or "fallen behind" on their career because they were out of the workplace for a long period of time. The stay at home spouse has gifted the breadwinner spouse with the opportunity to keep working with no interruption. I mean, I assume that both spouses want the kids to be well taken care of and have agreed on who should stay home in order to do that.

I've heard many guys basically shrug their shoulders and say, "Tough shit" if the stay at home spouse has a shitty career after a divorce. So what? That was their choice.

If that's the case, neither spouse should ever miss a day of work. And I'll add, they shouldn't cut their hours, shouldn't forgo out of town business trips, shouldn't miss overtime, shouldn't have a lower-paying job (which has more flexible hours to accommodate picking the kid up from school or taking them to appointments) either. Split the duties 50/50. Otherwise, the spouse who makes more concessions or downgrades their career (or just doesn't have one anymore in order to take care of the kids) has damaged their earning potential. When the other spouse then responds like, "tough shit for you"? Screw that. Obviously, the stay at home spouse's contribution was worthless and they should have never done it to begin with.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:

In another thread, Bushboar (our resident divorce lawyer) is saying that sometimes alimony is justified (but awarded too often). I'm waiting to read what he means by that.

But I wasn't thinking of alimony per se (nor was I not thinking of it) but more...is her staying home with the kids and keeping the home (to avoid having the kids in daycare) worth something, or isn't it?

Its definitely worth something. Especially if he wanted kids. Less so if she brow beat him into having kids.

If it's neither here nor there and makes absolutely no difference, then ALL mothers should have fulltime careers and the kids should always be in daycare.

Funny, I read a lot of comments from guys here where they lament that not enough women are happy being at home taking care of the family. So is her staying at home and being more family/kids/home-focused a good thing, or just her being a worthless leech who contributes nothing?

It can be both at different times. Being a stay at home spouse is a gift given by the breadwinner to the stay at home spouse. If the marriage fails, its time to step up and take care of yourself. Refusing to do so makes you a parasite.

I wouldn't say that the breadwinner is just "gifting" the stay at home spouse with the ability to stay home. That's just your spin on it. The breadwinner has a career that is intact and presumably advancing, and the stay at home spouse has limited or "fallen behind" on their career because they were out of the workplace for a long period of time. The stay at home spouse has gifted the breadwinner spouse with the opportunity to keep working with no interruption. I mean, I assume that both spouses want the kids to be well taken care of and have agreed on who should stay home in order to do that.

I've heard many guys basically shrug their shoulders and say, "Tough shit" if the stay at home spouse has a shitty career after a divorce. So what? That was their choice.

If that's the case, neither spouse should ever miss a day of work. And I'll add, they shouldn't cut their hours, shouldn't forgo out of town business trips, shouldn't miss overtime, shouldn't have a lower-paying job (which has more flexible hours to accommodate picking the kid up from school or taking them to appointments) either. Split the duties 50/50. Otherwise, the spouse who makes more concessions or downgrades their career (or just doesn't have one anymore in order to take care of the kids) has damaged their earning potential. When the other spouse then responds like, "tough shit for you"? Screw that. Obviously, the stay at home spouse's contribution was worthless and they should have never done it to begin with.

So, you are for splitting of marital assessments (not pre), but no alimony? Just so that we are on the same page.

Posted: 1/11/2019 12:16:13 PM EDT

[#15]

Quote History

Quoted:
Loose lips? Probably due to some type of exercise she's doing with those lips.

View Quote

Maybe they're loose because the need to be re-inflated?

Posted: 1/11/2019 12:20:27 PM EDT

[#16]

Quote History

Quoted:
Bezos is crazy, he needs to throttle back. Acts like he's been in a 25 marriage and just met a hot chick for the first time.

TEXTS TO SANCHEZ

https://screenshotscdn.firefoxusercontent.com/images/74ac3cba-802e-4b4f-b816-0db31c320dfd.png

More

View Quote

Like I said before, that's an inexperienced dick working at 110% power to fuck your life up.

Posted: 1/11/2019 12:24:31 PM EDT

[#17]

I think it's funny how some people here equate their own experiences of parenthood to those of multi-billonaires. Unless you have nannies,kitchen staff and personal assistants you have no idea what its like to be a billionaire parent of kids. Also,to assume there wasn't some sort of open marriage agreement from a relationship gone wrong years ago is foolish.

Posted: 1/11/2019 12:25:53 PM EDT

[#18]

Quote History

Quoted:
So, you are for splitting of marital assessments (not pre), but no alimony? Just so that we are on the same page.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:

In another thread, Bushboar (our resident divorce lawyer) is saying that sometimes alimony is justified (but awarded too often). I'm waiting to read what he means by that.

But I wasn't thinking of alimony per se (nor was I not thinking of it) but more...is her staying home with the kids and keeping the home (to avoid having the kids in daycare) worth something, or isn't it?

Its definitely worth something. Especially if he wanted kids. Less so if she brow beat him into having kids.

If it's neither here nor there and makes absolutely no difference, then ALL mothers should have fulltime careers and the kids should always be in daycare.

Funny, I read a lot of comments from guys here where they lament that not enough women are happy being at home taking care of the family. So is her staying at home and being more family/kids/home-focused a good thing, or just her being a worthless leech who contributes nothing?

It can be both at different times. Being a stay at home spouse is a gift given by the breadwinner to the stay at home spouse. If the marriage fails, its time to step up and take care of yourself. Refusing to do so makes you a parasite.

I wouldn't say that the breadwinner is just "gifting" the stay at home spouse with the ability to stay home. That's just your spin on it. The breadwinner has a career that is intact and presumably advancing, and the stay at home spouse has limited or "fallen behind" on their career because they were out of the workplace for a long period of time. The stay at home spouse has gifted the breadwinner spouse with the opportunity to keep working with no interruption. I mean, I assume that both spouses want the kids to be well taken care of and have agreed on who should stay home in order to do that.

I've heard many guys basically shrug their shoulders and say, "Tough shit" if the stay at home spouse has a shitty career after a divorce. So what? That was their choice.

If that's the case, neither spouse should ever miss a day of work. And I'll add, they shouldn't cut their hours, shouldn't forgo out of town business trips, shouldn't miss overtime, shouldn't have a lower-paying job (which has more flexible hours to accommodate picking the kid up from school or taking them to appointments) either. Split the duties 50/50. Otherwise, the spouse who makes more concessions or downgrades their career (or just doesn't have one anymore in order to take care of the kids) has damaged their earning potential. When the other spouse then responds like, "tough shit for you"? Screw that. Obviously, the stay at home spouse's contribution was worthless and they should have never done it to begin with.

So, you are for splitting of marital assessments (not pre), but no alimony? Just so that we are on the same page.

I have no idea. Bushboar sees a lot of things I haven't seen. I'm still curious to find out why he believes what he believes.

I'll give an outlier scenario where I'd be okay with alimony, though:

Guy marries an old-fashioned 18-year-old traditional (maybe Catholic?) girl who just graduated high school and who has only aspirations for home and family. That's what he wants, that's what she wants. She does a great job with the home and kids. Fast forward 20 years and he's got a great career and she's "just a homemaker." He starts to have an affair and wants to dump his simple, loving, decent, hard-working wife. But she's never had a job, never went to college and he WANTED her like that (and she was okay with it too).

I say she gets alimony, she goes to college and studies for a career. I don't know how long she gets alimony but a pretty damn long time because by this time she's 38 and is starting from square one and she did NOTHING wrong and he knew what she was like when he married her and he wanted her exactly the way she was. Until he didn't. That comes at a price and he should pay.

Most marriages aren't like this, but the ones who are at least somewhat close to this? I don't think alimony is so terrible.

The marriages where the wife is shitty at keeping the home and is screwing the pool boy? Where the husband encourages her to study and pursue an education and even though she's perfectly capable of doing so, she refuses (and she's shitty at caring for the home)? Where there aren't even any kids but she quits her career (not at his urging) because she's married and thinks she shouldn't have to work anymore? Nope.

Posted: 1/11/2019 12:27:43 PM EDT

[#19]

Quote History

Quoted:

Is there such a thing as a G rated dick pic?

View Quote

It depends on the size...

After reading that faggy text message, I’m pretty sure his was G rated.

Posted: 1/11/2019 12:30:14 PM EDT

[#20]

Quote History

Quoted:
I have no idea. Bushboar sees a lot of things I haven't seen. I'm still curious to find out why he believes what he believes.

I'll give an outlier scenario where I'd be okay with alimony, though:

Guy marries an old-fashioned 18-year-old traditional (maybe Catholic?) girl who just graduated high school and who has only aspirations for home and family. That's what he wants, that's what she wants. She does a great job with the home and kids. Fast forward 20 years and he's got a great career and she's "just a homemaker." He starts to have an affair and wants to dump his simple, loving, decent, hard-working wife. But she's never had a job, never went to college and he WANTED her like that (and she was okay with it too).

I say she gets alimony, she goes to college and studies for a career. I don't know how long she gets alimony but a pretty damn long time because by this time she's 38 and is starting from square one and she did NOTHING wrong and he knew what she was like when he married her and he wanted her exactly the way she was. Until he didn't. That comes at a price and he should pay.

Most marriages aren't like this, but the ones who are at least somewhat close to this? I don't think alimony is so terrible.

The marriages where the wife is shitty at keeping the home and is screwing the pool boy? Where the husband encourages her to study and pursue an education and even though she's perfectly capable of doing so, she refuses (and she's shitty at caring for the home)? Where there aren't even any kids but she quits her career (not at his urging) because she's married and thinks she shouldn't have to work anymore? Nope.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:

In another thread, Bushboar (our resident divorce lawyer) is saying that sometimes alimony is justified (but awarded too often). I'm waiting to read what he means by that.

But I wasn't thinking of alimony per se (nor was I not thinking of it) but more...is her staying home with the kids and keeping the home (to avoid having the kids in daycare) worth something, or isn't it?

Its definitely worth something. Especially if he wanted kids. Less so if she brow beat him into having kids.

If it's neither here nor there and makes absolutely no difference, then ALL mothers should have fulltime careers and the kids should always be in daycare.

Funny, I read a lot of comments from guys here where they lament that not enough women are happy being at home taking care of the family. So is her staying at home and being more family/kids/home-focused a good thing, or just her being a worthless leech who contributes nothing?

It can be both at different times. Being a stay at home spouse is a gift given by the breadwinner to the stay at home spouse. If the marriage fails, its time to step up and take care of yourself. Refusing to do so makes you a parasite.

I wouldn't say that the breadwinner is just "gifting" the stay at home spouse with the ability to stay home. That's just your spin on it. The breadwinner has a career that is intact and presumably advancing, and the stay at home spouse has limited or "fallen behind" on their career because they were out of the workplace for a long period of time. The stay at home spouse has gifted the breadwinner spouse with the opportunity to keep working with no interruption. I mean, I assume that both spouses want the kids to be well taken care of and have agreed on who should stay home in order to do that.

I've heard many guys basically shrug their shoulders and say, "Tough shit" if the stay at home spouse has a shitty career after a divorce. So what? That was their choice.

If that's the case, neither spouse should ever miss a day of work. And I'll add, they shouldn't cut their hours, shouldn't forgo out of town business trips, shouldn't miss overtime, shouldn't have a lower-paying job (which has more flexible hours to accommodate picking the kid up from school or taking them to appointments) either. Split the duties 50/50. Otherwise, the spouse who makes more concessions or downgrades their career (or just doesn't have one anymore in order to take care of the kids) has damaged their earning potential. When the other spouse then responds like, "tough shit for you"? Screw that. Obviously, the stay at home spouse's contribution was worthless and they should have never done it to begin with.

So, you are for splitting of marital assessments (not pre), but no alimony? Just so that we are on the same page.

I have no idea. Bushboar sees a lot of things I haven't seen. I'm still curious to find out why he believes what he believes.

I'll give an outlier scenario where I'd be okay with alimony, though:

Guy marries an old-fashioned 18-year-old traditional (maybe Catholic?) girl who just graduated high school and who has only aspirations for home and family. That's what he wants, that's what she wants. She does a great job with the home and kids. Fast forward 20 years and he's got a great career and she's "just a homemaker." He starts to have an affair and wants to dump his simple, loving, decent, hard-working wife. But she's never had a job, never went to college and he WANTED her like that (and she was okay with it too).

I say she gets alimony, she goes to college and studies for a career. I don't know how long she gets alimony but a pretty damn long time because by this time she's 38 and is starting from square one and she did NOTHING wrong and he knew what she was like when he married her and he wanted her exactly the way she was. Until he didn't. That comes at a price and he should pay.

Most marriages aren't like this, but the ones who are at least somewhat close to this? I don't think alimony is so terrible.

The marriages where the wife is shitty at keeping the home and is screwing the pool boy? Where the husband encourages her to study and pursue an education and even though she's perfectly capable of doing so, she refuses (and she's shitty at caring for the home)? Where there aren't even any kids but she quits her career (not at his urging) because she's married and thinks she shouldn't have to work anymore? Nope.

See, you are putting the caveat on what she can do with the alimony checks.

Why not just say he has to provide tuition money for education? Maybe a trade school? If the goal is to get her on her feet again, then it should be limited to those means.

Posted: 1/11/2019 12:40:11 PM EDT

[#21]

Quote History

Quoted:
See, you are putting the caveat on what she can do with the alimony checks.

Why not just say he has to provide tuition money for education? Maybe a trade school? If the goal is to get her on her feet again, then it should be limited to those means.