FSU women and marriage regulations

[Doll]

so it's OK for a man to think this way, and not OK for a woman to do this? 

 
My friend is getting divorced after almost 10 years of marriage (RW married to AM)- they have the prenup that leaves her with 10,000. This 10,000 looked OK for her before the wedding but what is it now? The part of the prenup that sounds " the solely   acquired proterty can't be split" also looked OK for her 10 years ago. So, during this marriage her husband only bought stuf on his name, etc. Not sure why she didn't work and save. I would save like a crazy if I had this sort of agreement.

[Patagonie]

Two excellents posts Kuna,
 
Just fews precisions : i spoke about 25000 $ of worthiness, not annual income, wich is different or perhaps i have misunderstanding what you have wrote.
 
You are introducing also a very interesting problem about : before a mariage how a woman can assess a man to know if he can support her ? In my opinion this a very difficult issue for women and as Donna_Pedro was saying they have not a lot of clue to assess not knowing the culture and what is economy in western countries. It's why i was saying "you don't know how many people are dreaming about the real world".
 About this issue i think that honests and patients explanations, without any lies are necessary to let her understand what is your "court" in the society. The problem is that many guys are bragging themself to "win" women. In my opinion only a fiancee visa (IN USA) with a two or three western months of western life can cancel almost all the "fog" dropped by men. It's why i would advice to any woman that it is more important for a serious relationship, to target beloved's city as soon as possible rather than to go in a warm paradise location. If hubby is the good one you will have enough time to go. 

[Patagonie]

My friend is getting divorced after almost 10 years of marriage (RW married to AM)- they have the prenup that leaves her with 10,000. This 10,000 looked OK for her before the wedding but what is it now? The part of the prenup that sounds " the solely   acquired proterty can't be split" also looked OK for her 10 years ago. So, during this marriage her husband only bought stuf on his name, etc. Not sure why she didn't work and save. I would save like a crazy if I had this sort of agreement.

 I consider  the demeanor of this man as not correct and 10000 is a very low amount. I'm not a lawyer but i'm not sure that he can protect him by buying all on his name.

[mies]

To add an interesting twist to this thread, let us view a hypothetical situation.

A while ago I have read on a different forum about RW with assets planning to marry an AM, and she was concerned that he lost his job recently, was struggling to pay his mortgage, and was accumulating a credit card debt at an exponential rate because he was trying to maintain the same lifestyle he was used to have while having a nice corporate job. The man's age was close to retiring. Woman was eager to support him financially until he would find a job, but was really afraid of his debts which had all inclination to become massive.

So. Let's imagine a situation, purely hypothetical, but still very likely in the MOB terrain. We have WM, in his 50s, who accumulated some assets during his career. He may have adult children from previous marriage, and ex-wife, but he has little contact with them. Or maybe he was single until now and suddenly decided to marry a 22yo "Russian Playmate of May 2011." 
He prepares prenup to protect his finances acquired before this marriage. She comes to USA. The guy loses his job or business, and develops some health problem. Bottom line: he has very little income and his health care cost are very high. 3-5 years after marriage the girl is 25-27, she gets her greencard or citizenship and realizes she isn't happy in her marriage anymore. She wants children, she wants sex, she wants fun and active life, and her husband cannot provide her any of that. So she asks for a divorce.

So let's say the man's assets prior to marriage are $ 1 mln. His debts accumulated while he was married to the RW are $350K (mostly his hospital bills), he was unemployed during their marriage, so his income was somehow based on his pre-marital assets. But the debt - was solely created during marriage.
What happens in the case of divorce? Does the wife get 50% of the debt? I am completely ignorant on the whole topic of divorce and dividing assets, and how prenups work and other stuff like that. So please, don't throw rotten tomatoes at me. I am genuinely curious what will happen to RW in a situation like that.

Since there are so many men in their 50s and over marrying relatively young FSUW, the economy is in bad shape, many of those men aren't in perfect health (and some of them - lost their perfect health while earning their pre-marital assets) I think my example is quite realistic.

[mies]

My friend is getting divorced after almost 10 years of marriage (RW married to AM)- they have the prenup that leaves her with 10,000. This 10,000 looked OK for her before the wedding but what is it now? The part of the prenup that sounds " the solely   acquired proterty can't be split" also looked OK for her 10 years ago. So, during this marriage her husband only bought stuf on his name, etc. Not sure why she didn't work and save. I would save like a crazy if I had this sort of agreement.

that's why women must work, and be career-minded and selfish feminists, and the guys who order a MOB to have a "traditional wife" - should take a hike. 

(in all of my posts I am only partly serious, and only partly joking  )


****
Pat, I can answer some of your question about my assets and things like that.
 Since I got married quite young,  and my parents aren't rich, my "worth" before the wedding was the market price of my share in the co-owned apartment, roughly $30-40K. I was making approximately $500/mo at the time when I was leaving Ukraine. Had I stayed there at my job in Kiev, by now I would be making around $2'000/mo.
 
 I am not going to discuss the possibility of me divorcing because I hope I will stay married to the same man for my lifetime.
 But. you are basing your arguments on wrong assumptions. You assume that FSUW have very little worth at the time of marriage, and that they gain much more being married than had they stayed at home. This is not true. Most of them are very young, and are in early stages of their career, when their full potential isn't quite known, but they have all chances to become very successful at home. They also can get married at home and have happy families there.
 
 So you really should take into account the alternative cost of such decision for a woman.
 
 You should not be comparing "she was making 150$/mo and was single/lonely at her 22" to "after divorcing her 65yo husband of 10 years she now has an apartment back in Ukraine or EUR10'000 of compensation". You should be comparing that at 32, the chances for such woman to return to home country, find a husband, form a new family, and build her career are ridiculously low. And what you describe as a "gain" to such woman, is really a joke. And I am not even touching on the topic that in many cases FSUW divorce their WM not because RWs were gold-diggers, but because their husbands turned out to be control freaks and generally unstable and unlikable people. I've talked to several RWs who went through such experience.
 

[Donna_Pedro]

You sound pretty bitter.
Let me put it another way, if I was single and met a woman whom I loved and upon discussing marriage she would ask me to sign a prenup. I would not think anything wrong with it.
[/quote

The difference between me and you is that I do not need to operate in terms  of "if". When I got married 10 years ago I had a few properties in Moscow, acquired way before I met my husband. I had all the reasons in the world to have my husband sign a pre-nup, protecting potential equity (and in ten years it has become rather considerable), but I did not.  So please forgive me if I do not buy all this "bitter" bs.

[mies]

i think that honests and patients explanations, without any lies are necessary

yes they are. I agree with both Gator and Doll. With Gator on that prenups are necessary to protect one's assets from their spouse. And with Doll on that prenup is not about love, it's a business contract.
Back to your comment on honesty and sincerity: how many businessmen you know who would honestly and sincerely tell everything to their competitor or potential raider who is trying to steal their business?

[Donna_Pedro]

so it's OK for a man to think this way, and not OK for a woman to do this? 

exactly! A man talking about a pre-nup is a "reasonable person", a woman doing the same is - a gold digger. This is  a clear manipulation.   

[Patagonie]

I like your curiosity Mies and also am i.

I think you are correct in what you have said and that the wife will get 50% of the debt. But in the reality with one million $ of asset it is in my opinion impossible to accumulated 350000$ of debt. The system doesn't work like this, there will be an army of lanwers who will send you to the court. Or the guy need to organize the invisibility of his asset and we are not so far from a criminal activity.  I remember the husband of my cousine who was a very talented businessman. He was very good to escape from IRS and not pay taxes. But when he divorced my cousine gets valuables assets as one flat near Paris, one chase property in one of the most famous french forest ranch ... 
 
 
"Since there are so many men in their 50s and over marrying relatively young FSUW, the economy is in bad shape, many of those men aren't in perfect health (and some of them - lost their perfect health while earning their pre-marital assets) I think my example is quite realistic."
I think that you remember my post about this problem. It's where FSU women are weak to detect and understand with whom they are going. And of course the first step crisis is getting worse because we are starting a second wave more dramatic. Because i like figure i can tell you that my complementary insurance health have increased of 50% here in less than 18 months (or 12). The numbers of people who refuse an inheritance have increased also (because elderly get more an more debts), people who are going to a special debt court have also increased. So all the middle class is getting down. Just very rich and rich (difficult concept that i don't want to enter in, but to push a bottom line i would say up to 15000$ per month and a total property of at least 2 millions of $ are richer and richer, and this not happens only in my country.
 

[Donna_Pedro]

Back to your comment on honesty and sincerity: how many businessmen you know who would honestly and sincerely tell everything to their competitor or potential raider who is trying to steal their business?

Excellent point!


  One of my most favorite jokes is "why does a dog lick its balls? Because it can" This is exactly the deal with pre-nups. There is nothing fair about them  (in am-rw relationships), but since men are in control of the situation they can afford to insist . And some women who are very desperate to get out - agree to sign them.

[mies]

I think you are correct in what you have said and that the wife will get 50% of the debt. But in the reality with one million $ of asset cannot cumulated 350000$ of debt.

why not?
Let's say the guy has the house, some bank savings, and a retirement plan. Total value: $1 mln.

Major part of the debt are bills from hospitals, insurance company refuses to pay them.

I think in order to legal system go after guy's home and bank savings, he first need to officially file for bankruptcy and declare "I cannot pay it". What if he decided that he cannot pay the debt in full, but he can pay the half of it. And he initiated the divorce - in order to let his wife take care of the rest of debt.

If you think 350K is unrealistic, let's make it 150K. This is very realistic. Where from the RW in a foreign country is supposed to get 75K to pay off the debt of her (ex)husband? 

I am not completely sure what point I am trying to make with my hypothetical example, probably that it is really hard to design a good and balanced prenup, and the husband has all the incentives and tools to make the prenup good for him and bad for his wife.

P.S. and thank you for elaborating in your reply. I like the ideas you are expressing.

[Patagonie]

The difference between me and you is that I do not need to operate in terms  of "if". When I got married 10 years ago I had a few properties in Moscow, acquired way before I met my husband. I had all the reasons in the world to have my husband sign a pre-nup, protecting potential equity (and in ten years it has become rather considerable), but I did not.  So please forgive me if I do not buy all this "bitter" bs.

 
Donna_Pedro, you are  atypical in the social landscape, may you understand ? Do you consider that your case is the exception or the normal way ? It's why it's important for me to understand where you come from and for what i know of the world (and i have spend time abroad)  i can guarantee that is rare in FSU scene. Do you think that men can draw a rule based on your case ?

 

[Donna_Pedro]

 On the contrary the attitude of Donna_Pedro lets me guess that we are exactly on the right track.
 

Donna_Pedro's  attitude is based on 10 years of successful marriage to a western men and 10 years of life in the United states, with clear understanding of reality  and ability to analyze and compare her situation ten years ago and now. And looking back I am saying unequivocally- no f..ing way!

[Patagonie]

why not?
Let's say the guy has the house, some bank savings, and a retirement plan. Total value: $1 mln.

Major part of the debt are bills from hospitals, insurance company refuses to pay them.

I think in order to legal system go after guy's home and bank savings, he first need to officially file for bankruptcy and declare "I cannot pay it". What if he decided that he cannot pay the debt in full, but he can pay the half of it. And he initiated the divorce - in order to let his wife take care of the rest of debt.

If you think 350K is unrealistic, let's make it 150K. This is very realistic. Where from the RW in a foreign country is supposed to get 75K to pay off the debt of her (ex)husband? 

P.S. and thank you for elaborating in your reply. I like the ideas you are expressing.

 
To some limit you are right. . I'm not a specialist and a lot of guys are more skilled but it seems to me that you cannot make health debt in USA if you don't want to pay you cannot make debt because you have no admission !!! Again there are a lot of US fellows who can really perform better than me to explain this.
Here, contrary to Ukraine, you cannot divorce instantly so i cannot imagine the judge let the guy go with 1m $ and split the bill with the wife who has almost nothing. Do you know for example that here if your mother go to hospital and she don't have enough money to pay childrens are under the law ?
 

[Patagonie]

yes they are. I agree with both Gator and Doll. With Gator on that prenups are necessary to protect one's assets from their spouse. And with Doll on that prenup is not about love, it's a business contract. 
 
 
 
This is where you can detect dishonest men  : just be curious !
Back to your comment on honesty and sincerity: how many businessmen you know who would honestly and sincerely tell everything to their competitor or potential raider who is trying to steal their business?

 
 
 

[Donna_Pedro]

 
Donna_Pedro, you are  atypical in the social landscape, may you understand ? Do you consider that your case is the exception or the normal way ? It's why it's important for me to understand where you come from and for what i know of the world (and i have spend time abroad)  i can guarantee that is rare in FSU scene. Do you think that men can draw a rule based on your case ?

 

What exactly is  rare? Women from moscow or other big cities? Women having properties in their ownership in Russia?  Where do all of them live prior to relocation abroad? in the street? The amount might differ but the principal is rather common. At least as far as my generation goes. Of course if you are marrying a 20 yo straight from mommy's and daddy's house - then I agree, its probably slightly different but in essence - it is also the same.

[GQBlues]

If we are talking about am-aw marriage - no, its not gender specific. AW, who lived all her life here, has relatives and friends to advise her (aside from a lawyer) and english is her native languge, would know what to do not to lose anything signing a pre-nup. RW - is a different story.

I will agree with that. Heck, if RWs were as aware of AMs as AWs are, there wouldn't be a bride industry. Look at the noise IMBRA created...

But the realities are...
 
- FSUWs wouldn't know one way or another, pre-nup or not, toaster warranty or without; what fate awaits them after POE. Simply because her man didn't ask her to sign any pre-nup that she's automatically much better off than one who was asked to do so by her man. That isn't being realistic. I think pre-nups can be an opportunity for one to secure themselves in the event of a divorce.
 
Further, AMs haven't got a clue about any woman's 'liquidity or assets' in FSU either. If any...
 
And lastly, what 'equity of assets' are you talking about?      10 years here and you failed to realize that isn't reality for some of these women ( apparently, as I didn't know this either)?  You're talking 'equity of assets' while men around here are talking about taking their women to garage sales for their monthly $50.00 clothing allowance. With conviction, too. LOL, and you think pre-nups are unfair?  Literally a man can write any of these women $6,000.00 day one for her clothing allowance and not have to worry about it for the next 10 years. Double that amount, apparently covers her food expense for the same lenght of time, too. More or less.
 
Equity on Assets'. LOL. Seriously, as this isn't a laughing matter, this is apparently a reality for some FSUWs who immigrated by way of the MOB.....and  happily so, apparently.
 
So if you start looking at this from that perspective, taking yours and these other women's respective realities into account, wouldn't you agree that a man who present a 'comprehensive' pre-nup (his asset protection - her post-marriage welfare security) is, or can be considered, beneficial for the woman as well?
 
In some (many?) instances, likely even preferable, if you (not you, but in general) honestly give this an ounce of consideration. Would you agree with that?

[Patagonie]

What exactly is  rare? Women from moscow or other big cities? Women having properties in their ownership in Russia?  Where do all of them live prior to relocation abroad? in the street? The amount might differ but the principal is rather common. At least as far as my generation goes. Of course if you are marrying a 20 yo straight from mommy's and daddy's house - then I agree, its probably slightly different but in essence - it is also the same.

  In my opinion, and i'm expressing my personal view, your seeing is shifted in comparison of the reality of the FSU society. I have a personnal theory which i name concentrique circle theory. To say simple people consort with the two circles above and or the two circles below but rarely more, which bias of course their reprensation of the world.

[Donna_Pedro]

 
 

FSUWs wouldn't know one way or another, pre-nup or not, toaster warranty or without; what fate awaits them after POE. Simply because her man didn't ask her to sign any pre-nup that she's automatically much better off than one who was asked to do so by her man. That isn't being realistic.

 Why would I  voluntary add something potentially bad to the situation which is already soooo complicated??

Further, AMs haven't got a clue about any woman's 'liquidity or assets' in FSU either. If any...

Why wouldnt they? My husband did.
 

So if you start looking at this from that perspective, taking yours and these other women's respective realities into account, wouldn't you agree that a man who present a 'comprehensive' pre-nup (his asset protection - her post-marriage welfare security) is, or can be considered, beneficial for the woman as well?

I do remember the same topic a while ago on the old forum, RWguide.com. A man was seriously talking to include into a prenup alimony to his wife-to-be based on average salary at her town in Ukraine. It was smth like $300 a month or so. And he was defending his point of view, saying, if she divorced him, she needed to go back and she would be provided a "decent" support. Yes, a judge would probably turn such a pre-nup down, but this example just shows you that "rights" and "wrongs" are very very subjective terms. So are "support", "protection", "welfare". As far as your question goes, if I was to sign a pre-nup now, after 10 years, I would agree. I would hire a shark-attorney and a CPA to investigate and give me comprehensive analyses of all man's assets in dynamics for the last 10 years with a good-heart estimate of their future performance and a clear understanding of what I am looking at. (Can you imagine any rw without experience of living here  doing it? ) Nobody would "feed" me a $300 alimony because I know better now. Ten years ago.. putting myself into that girl's shoes, I would have probably  agreed for $300.


 

[Doll]

 
- FSUWs wouldn't know one way or another, pre-nup or not, toaster warranty or without; what fate awaits them after POE. Simply because her man didn't ask her to sign any pre-nup that she's automatically much better off than one who was asked to do so by her man. That isn't being realistic. I think pre-nups can be an opportunity for one to secure themselves in the event of a divorce.
 
   . 

You're right till we define what a "reasonable" prenup is.
What?
Prenups can be an opportinity for RW to secure herself unless it is a stinky one))))
 

[Doll]

 

 


I do remember the same topic a while ago on the old forum, RWguide.com. A man was seriously talking to include into a prenup alimony to his wife-to-be based on average salary at her town in Ukraine. It was smth like $300 a month or so. And he was defending his point of view, saying, if she divorced him, she needed to go back and she would be provided a "decent" support.   

How touching!

[Gator]

My friend is getting divorced after almost 10 years of marriage (RW married to AM)- they have the prenup that leaves her with 10,000.

You asked "What is reasonable?"  This prenup is unreasonable and would likely be unenforceable.
 
Also, for long marriages, judges give less consideration to a prenup.  10 years is still probably short of a long marriage, yet it is getting close.
 
 

So, during this marriage her husband only bought stuf on his name, etc. Not sure why she didn't work and save. I would save like a crazy if I had this sort of agreement.

A reasonable prenup would allow a woman to retain her earned income less appropriate taxes if her income was less than the man's (including his investment income). 
 
A comprehensive prenup will specify ownership, whether joint or individual.
 
 
 

[Gator]

So let's say the man's assets prior to marriage are $ 1 mln. His debts accumulated while he was married to the RW are $350K (mostly his hospital bills), he was unemployed during their marriage, so his income was somehow based on his pre-marital assets. But the debt - was solely created during marriage.
What happens in the case of divorce? Does the wife get 50% of the debt?

Those debts were incurred by him and he is responsible for paying them with his assets.  What if the $350K were her hospital bills (women get sick too)?  A wife has spousal rights and he would likely be responsible for her healthcare dependent upon her income, etc.
 
 

Since there are so many men in their 50s and over marrying relatively young FSUW, the economy is in bad shape, many of those men aren't in perfect health (and some of them - lost their perfect health while earning their pre-marital assets) I think my example is quite realistic.

I mentioned much earlier that a reasonable prenup will address death and illness as well as divorce.   A good husband will provide something for his wife if he became incapacitated or died rather than leaving all of his assets to his children from a former marriage.   Provisions in a prenup would take precedent over his estate plan, yet to avoid expensive court proceedings the two should be consistent.   

[Gator]

The difference between me and you is that I do not need to operate in terms  of "if". When I got married 10 years ago I had a few properties in Moscow, acquired way before I met my husband. I had all the reasons in the world to have my husband sign a pre-nup, protecting potential equity (and in ten years it has become rather considerable), but I did not.  So please forgive me if I do not buy all this "bitter" bs.

Another Moscowvite with considerable assets.  I recall visiting your mama's lovely and large apartment in a nice area of Moscow.  They are likely protected provided you do not sell the apartments and use the money to buy a jointly owned American home (no comingling).  Rental income during your marriage could be another matter dependent upon many factors.  My ex-wife also had multiple properties in Moscow.   Unlike many AW, most  RW have no debt and some have significant assets.

[Gator]

.... and the husband has all the incentives and tools to make the prenup good for him and bad for his wife.

Not if she has her own attorney protecting her.  And if the prenup is so tilted in favor of one party that a reasonable and informed person would never have signed it, the judge will most likely dismiss the prenup.