|
|
Post by ironhamster on Sept 16, 2020 10:17:14 GMT -5
Holy shit! He lavished her with money and gifts, but never married and never cohabitated. He wouldn't marry her because she wouldn't sign a prenup. Now, the Canadian courts have weighed in.
|
|
|
|
Post by Handy on Sept 16, 2020 16:51:13 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by mirrororchid on Sept 16, 2020 20:01:34 GMT -5
Holy shit! He lavished her with money and gifts, but never married and never cohabitated. He wouldn't marry her because she wouldn't sign a prenup. Now, the Canadian courts have weighed in. Do Canadian women complain men don't like to commit? If so, this will NOT help. It'd be helpful to have some guidance just how long you can be bumping stomachs with someone before it becomes professional. |
|
|
|
Post by baza on Sept 16, 2020 20:31:50 GMT -5
In my jurisdiction, it makes no difference if you are married, or you are co-habitating, or in a same sex deal.
The *rules* applicable will apply just the same.
As ever in these situations, the smart play is to see a lawyer in YOUR jurisdiction to establish how a split up would shake out for you.
What might apply in Canada (as per the video clip) is interesting, but only relevant to you if your are in Canada.
|
|
|
|
Post by mirrororchid on Sept 17, 2020 5:53:42 GMT -5
In my jurisdiction, it makes no difference if you are married, or you are co-habitating, or in a same sex deal. The *rules* applicable will apply just the same. As ever in these situations, the smart play is to see a lawyer in YOUR jurisdiction to establish how a split up would shake out for you. What might apply in Canada (as per the video clip) is interesting, but only relevant to you if your are in Canada. Really? If you don't even live together alimony is owed? Which district so we make sure never to move there. As for Canada, I'd suggest limiting all sexual relationships to 5 months 29 days. We'll see if anyone is required to pay for sex then. Maybe the judge would be able to recommend a maximum sexual relationship duration where sex is one of the best things in life that remains free. Honestly. The courts are now enforcing casual sex? The multi-millionaire got off easy. www.nj.com/hunterdon-county-democrat/2012/12/divorcee_sits_in_jail_while_ua.html#incart_m-rpt-2SNL was on this almost half a century ago. |
|
|
|
Post by ironhamster on Sept 20, 2020 3:40:08 GMT -5
mirrororchid, the judge in your article, just like all other judges, has complete immunity from liability. Judges can, on a whim, make the worst calls possible and go to bed that night knowing their retirement packages are intact.
|
|
|
|
Post by greatcoastal on Sept 20, 2020 8:43:40 GMT -5
Double standards? maybe? Maybe not.... The times they are a changin'! Woman are outnumbering men with college degrees, more and more young men are continuing to live with their parents, dual incomes is practically a necessity...There will be court cases in which the girlfriend will be paying the boyfriend.
|
|
|
|
Post by pfviento on Sept 20, 2020 10:05:55 GMT -5
That is insanity.
|
|
|
|
Post by saarinista on Sept 20, 2020 12:37:31 GMT -5
Double standards? maybe? Maybe not.... The times they are a changin'! Woman are outnumbering men with college degrees, more and more young men are continuing to live with their parents, dual incomes is practically a necessity...There will be court cases in which the girlfriend will be paying the boyfriend. Lots of women need to get woke about money IMHO. |
|
|
|
Post by mirrororchid on Sept 21, 2020 6:01:44 GMT -5
Double standards? maybe? Maybe not.... The times they are a changin'! Woman are outnumbering men with college degrees, more and more young men are continuing to live with their parents, dual incomes is practically a necessity...There will be court cases in which the girlfriend will be paying the boyfriend. I see a day when women are really going to have to switch around priorities in one way or another. Two incomes necessary? I put it to you we've reached the point two incomes are INADEQUATE! The money fetish of America has led to a laissez faire economy where we treasure the idea of being wealthy. We not only consider it our right, we've bestowed that hope upon everyone and in a world of finite resources, it's starting to show its consequences. If women seek out a partner not just for children generation and upbringing but for financial support, they may find every available man to be taken. They will either need two men to produce the income they feel will produce sufficient income to have a "decent" home and lifestyle, or they'll need to share a man of means with additional women. Three or more incomes will become the norm with wealthy people increasingly calling the shots of who belongs where. We may see evolve little hives in a combination of marvelous utopias of mutual appreciation, and diseased, twisted exploitation by masters/mistresses that enslave their lovers in a trap of creature comforts and dependency. As these hives become the only financial arrangements that can afford to purchase a home, (unless you move two hours from a major job center), mere couples will be relegated to the rental market, renting homes owned by an elderly couple who bought it as their retirement passive income, one of the hives, or a corporation. The political machinery that extols the accumulation of wealth by the lucky, gifted, hard-working, or unscrupulous will bring about a what will be considered a vision of Gomorrah by their allies and they won't understand where it came form, how to reverse it, or that it was inevitable. May need to re-post this on the macroeconomics thread on the "Off-Topic" section. |
|
|
|
Post by Handy on Sept 21, 2020 8:45:39 GMT -5
Mirrororchid if women are going to have t husbands I look at China to start (actually reinvent) the trend.
In 2018, there were around 713 million male inhabitants and 682 million female inhabitants living in China.
From Wiki
Fraternal polyandry is practiced among Tibetans in Nepal and parts of China, in which two or more brothers are married to the same wife, with the wife having equal "sexual access" to them.[5][6] It is associated with partible paternity, the cultural belief that a child can have more than one father.[4]
Polyandry is believed to be more likely in societies with scarce environmental resources. It is believed to limit human population growth and enhance child survival.[6][7] It is a rare form of marriage that exists not only among peasant families but also among the elite families.
|
|
|
|
Post by Apocrypha on Sept 24, 2020 14:22:08 GMT -5
In my jurisdiction, it makes no difference if you are married, or you are co-habitating, or in a same sex deal. The *rules* applicable will apply just the same. As ever in these situations, the smart play is to see a lawyer in YOUR jurisdiction to establish how a split up would shake out for you. What might apply in Canada (as per the video clip) is interesting, but only relevant to you if your are in Canada. This is indeed in my jurisdiction in Canada, and is of great interest to me. To be clear - this ruling is in a case in which there is no shared household, no cohabitation, children, nor co-mingled finances. It is indistinguishable from "going steady" in principle, with someone who you don't split costs of the relationship with. This is simply a matter of two people dating a long time. Now that I'm dating, I'm trying to understand what these implications mean. |
|
|
|
Post by lessingham on Sept 30, 2020 3:01:56 GMT -5
There was a case here where a guy had to pay maintenance for his child from a relationship. A few years later he got DNA proof he was not the father. The judge ruled tough, the child had grwn up with the maintenance so he must continue.
|
|
|
|
Post by Handy on Sept 30, 2020 5:44:08 GMT -5
Lessingham
The judge ruled tough, the child had grwn up with the maintenance so he must continue.
That is normal. Once the so called father's name is on the birth certificate, he is stuck with the job just as if he adopted the child.
It is called "for the benefit of the child."
|
|
|
|
Post by mirrororchid on Sept 30, 2020 5:51:51 GMT -5
Lessingham The judge ruled tough, the child had grown up with the maintenance so he must continue. That is normal. Once the so called father's name is on the birth certificate, he is stuck with the job just as if he adopted the child. It is called "for the benefit of the child." For the benefit of the rutting animal that spreads his seed free of charge. What's to stop the himbo from having an army of children on other people's dime? That a good way to demolish society. Make it a small enough town and you get accidental incest for God's sake. |
|
