PreNups, Trusts, Offshore Accounts & Protecting yourself

[jb]

I can tell you this much JB, The ladies I meet in the USA sure are ugly.  You can believe that one for sure.

I've never been to Beaver Falls, PA, but I did spend some time in Philidelphia, or as we called it "Filthydelphia", and I didn't see many keepers while I was there.  Michigan also seems to be pretty poor pickin's, with Wyoming, the Dakotas, and Utah coming in dead last.

If your interested, there have been many surveys over the years that say the nations most beautiful women come from Atlanta, GA, Houston, and Dallas, TX, while the most charming come from Savanna, GA., New Orleans, LA. and Mobile, AL.

I've lived in both Dallas and Houston and can attest to the fact that both cities are loaded with good looking women.  Their attitudes suck, but there are a lot of pretties there.

I have a friend that I was in Ukraine with who likes much younger women.  Actually he is 62 and likes 19 year olds.

There's a name for this disorder.... It's called pedophilia.  Regardless of how much money he has, you might not want to invite this friend over when you next have a birthday party for the kiddies.

I agree with the post that supported honesty with understatement, I think over stating ones wealth can get a fellow in trouble faster than anything else.

[Dave_home]

    Dave

[KenC]

There's a name for this disorder.... It's called pedophilia. Regardless of how much money he has, you might not want to invite this friend over when you next have a birthday party for the kiddies

.
jb,

I know you probably wrote this to be cute or flippant, but you should be more careful with such accusations.  I would think that any "normal" male of any age would be sexually attracted to a young hard body.  I don't think that is deviant in any way.  Acting on it may be foolish, but still not deviant behavior.  Now if she were 12, I might agree with you, but at what age spread does foolish become deviant?  I don't know.  I guess I am sensitive to this because I was accused this way on the other forum and I took great exception to it.

KenC

[BC]

Ken,

I think I would have personally felt a bit 'foolish' if she would have been younger than my eldest child. Legality is one thing but there are psychological limits as well..

[Bruno]

Direct the big word "pedophilia"... some definitions :

Diagnostic criteria for 302.2 Pedophilia:

• A. Over a period of at least 6 months, recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors involving sexual activity with a prepubescent child or children (generally age 13 years or younger). [/*]
  
• B. The person has acted on these urges, or the sexual urges or fantasies cause marked distress or interpersonal difficulty. [/*]
  
• C. The person is at least age 16 years and at least 5 years older than the child or children in Criterion A.

[/*]
Note: Do not include an individual in late adolescence involved in an ongoing sexual relationship with a 12- or 13-year-old.
Attraction to female adolescents is sometimes referred to as "Lolita syndrome".

Sexual desires including youths are common among adults with a heterosexual or homosexual orientation, though their attraction is not specifically to persons that young. Only when it is a specific and exclusive attraction, is it labeled ephebophilia as a sexual condition or orientation. It should also be noted that unlike pedophilia, attraction to adolescents has never been regarded by psychologists as pathological. In fact, it has often been considered normative in some societies, such as those in which adolescent girls have been married to adult men. Nonetheless, it is often illegal for adults to act on an attraction to adolescents below a certain age, and such activity is disapproved of in many societies.

BC, the psychological limits are your own limit... religion is one of the limit... before, homosexuality, abortus was not accepted... in Japan, sexual relation with young adult are not a problem... cultural limit...

Myself, i have my own limit but i don't judge the limit of other... Until the relation is between two adult who have give a mutual consentment, it is not a problem... if one is 18 year old, and the other 98 year old, it is not our problem... certainly when they are happy together...

[jb]

Ken,

Yes, I was being flip.  Sometimes the best way to make a point is to use a bit of humor.  Maybe I should have loaded the post with smilies, or said something like, "IMHO, a man should not date a woman younger that his Tuxedo", or maybe,,,"19y.o.?? Heck, I've got socks and underwear older than that~!".  Trying to put it in perspective,,, how old were these girls when this man was 52?  Do you see my point?

Bruno,

I'm not discussing legal ages here, but trying in some small way to convey a notion of what may or may not build a viable marriage.  A 62 y.o. man playing with 19 y.o. girls is, once again, IMHO, playing with fire.  I know very well the correct definition of pedophilia, the fact that you posted in defense of such a relationship has me scratching my head a bit.

Men may do as they wish, it's no skin off my nose, but if they come here asking for an opinion, and we give them the benefit of our experience and best advice, they should accept it as such rather than take an unreasonable position and then try to defend it to the death.

Kind of like a young man coming into a panel of experts and asking, "Hey, do you think it's a good idea to go skydiving without a parachute?".  All the old experts say, "No, that's a foolish idea.", and the young, inexperienced guy sez, "I still want to try it."..... So be it, it's your life.

[Bruno]

[line]
Bruno... I know very well the correct definition of pedophilia, the fact that you posted in defense of such a relationship has me scratching my head a bit.

[line]
I have not post in defense of pedophilia... love with children...

But a woman from 19 year old is not more a children... in these case, we speak about ephebophilia...

I don't agree with ephebophilia but i feel that we have not the right to judge since it is two adult people who build a relation ... i ask only to be more open minded ...

Several old men in these forum are married with very young woman... and they have no problem with this...

I have post in defence of the freedom... the freedom to make what you will since it is legal... and in these case, the man from 62 year have not ask advice... and you say that he is "pedophile"...

In place of accuse someone of "pedophilia", it is better to explain why it not not good to try this :

"greater the age difference the less likely the man will be able to keep up with his lady's youthful exuberance as she pursues life's maturing experiences... It is true that Russian women will accept much older men, but marrying someone 30 years your junior is a high-risk proposition in my opinion. There is no doubt in my mind that Russian women are more mature than American women of the same age, but a 20 year old girl is still a 20 year old girl, and they lack the emotional experience that most mature men take for granted. "

I hope for you that these guy go never read these forum ... with all his money ( he is very rich if i have good understand ), he can make a wonderful proces for public slanderings :?...

:cool: ADVICE TO THE OVER-50 AMERICAN MEN SEEKING RUSSIAN WIVES
[the rest of you guys can skip this]
http://www.love-from-russia.be/am26.htm

By Richard

[Photo Guy]

Ken,
You're right. I guess he was just kidding.
Pedophilia involves pre-pubescent children

In my work, I often travel to high schools and drive a
bus full of 16 or 17 year olds to a camp or
Disneyland or wherever. I can tell you some of these
young women look stunning. I'm not going to feel
guilty about that attraction.  -doug L.

[Photo Guy]

Pre Soviet Ukraine.
I read recently that in days of old, couples married
in Ukraine at the age of 15!!  Its' amazing to think
that was a social norm at one time.  -doug L.
...I guess it makes sense considering people only lived
to be 35 or 40, right?

[Bruno]

It is not so old ... before the 12 may 2000, the legal age for marriage in Ukraine was set at 16 years-old for women and 18 years-old for men. Now, it is 17 years-old for women and 18 years-old for men . ( ZAHS )

[TigerPaws]

Hello all,

 Well having just got back from a wonderful time in the Caribbean and taken a little time to read through the varoius posts I see the topic has wondered again.

 While I understand that many men do not feel they have enough assets to be overly concerned about a prenup they should look to their future and do everything possible to protect yourself. Ok some have expressed views about fairness to the prospective wife, well I am sorry but most who have been though a divorce can agree that fairness like the truth is the first thing to out the window in most legal matters. Like I have been saying a prenup is but one of several ways a man can protect himself both now and in the future. Protecting your hard earned money, possesions and assets goes far beyond a failed marrage with the proper protections in place you can protect yourself from many if not all legal actions it all depends on how far you want to take things.

 Some here have questioned why I use offshore accounts and how I keep track of them, well let me answer it this way, like so many things in life it is not all that difficult. Just because I use a number of shell corporations through various countries dose not mean that you have to, there are many ways so shelter your assets depending on your needs. As for your bride these protections can also work for her as well if something should happen to you then with the proper instructions you bride could have access to your assets and have the same protections as you enjoyed, it all depends on how you set things up.

 Ok lets say for a minute you are the average Joe (whatever that is) and you have a home with say 100k in equity, plus a retiremant (401k or whatever) worth another 75k. Just for the sake of argument lets assume you have another 50k worth of assets (boat, guns and whatever else you have collected over the years). You have about 225k in assets to shelter before you marry the girl a reasonable amount in anyone opinion, plus your retirement and home will go up over time in value increasing your net worth.

 It would be very easy to set up a protected trust for your retirement account(s) which would comletly protect them from your future wife should you ever divorce. Then their is you house, you can set up an offshore corporation in say the Caymen Islands and sell your 100k worth of equity as a second mortgage to the corporation that you own there by rendering your house worthless to anyone who would attempt to attach a lein against it. Then every year or so you simply renew the second mortguage for however much you house increases in value. Now before all of you who disagre with this approach jump all over me about this, I am describig one of many ays someone can protect themselves because everyone is different there is no one approach I am only describing one f many which are available.

 As for your personal assets (boat, guns, art or whatever) you can also sell these to a seperate trust which you and you alone control and while you no longer directly own these things you can still use them, sell them, insure thm because you control the trust. Remember there is a vast difference between owning something and controling something.

 Anyway this is just my small attempt to bring the thread back on track.

TigerPaws

By-the-way we were down in Antiqua on holiday and buying a home overlooking our own private beach. Everything came off great and we love the new house.

[in_phoenix]

Hey I didn't read this thing the whole way through, 6 freaking pages but here is my 0.02 worth.

I was married to an american woman who practically screwed me over.  She didn't do jack but sit around on her ass. Didn't contribute one bit.  I paid for the cars, the house, the food, the clothes on her back, and even HER children.  Unfortunately here, the judges love to give alimony.  I did my own paper work and I kept the house, the one car not paid for and a bunch of other stuff because I made sure to give her a few items and the fact that I dtook care of all the outstanding debt to make it all balance.  At the same rate she was still awarded alimony for one year.  Prick.

I got luck.  It could have been a lot worse and I could have lost a lot more.  She tried to play it so she would make out and get paid for the rest of her life.  Hahaha I got the last laugh.

This same thing is no starting to become my new concern if I ever get to the point of marrying someone again.  Pre-nup sounds cold, reminds my of that Billy Bob Thorton and Kloony movie with the Masey Iron Clad pre-nup, but I think the next time it is going to be used.  Yes it all comes down to trust.  I posted in another thread about trust.  The real point is who can you trust here?  If if you think you can trust it can come back to bite you in the ass.  I've been to the edge and it is some where I would never go again.  I have no problem in sharing if that person is there for the long haul, but don't come here with the false intent to screw me over.

There is no guarantees.  Sorry you did not buy the extended warranty when you got a wife.

After the first divorce my moto became "TRUST NO ONE" as a reminder take a look at the back of a twenty "IN GOD WE TRUST" - therefore trust no one else.

[TigerPaws]

If EVER there was a doubt about the need for a prenup as well as putting in place additional protections read this! Again and again and again.

http://edition.cnn.com/2005/LAW/03/25/divorce.settlement.ap/index.html

[Elen]

I read that Again and again and again:? and my wish to move to America becomes stronger and stronger and stronger :DSuch nice judicial system

[TigerPaws]

and my wish to move to America becomes stronger and stronger and stronger :DSuch nice judicial system

Lucky for us (Americans) this is not going to happen anytime soon.

 

[Elen]

Why are you so sure:P??

[Frank]

Tigerpaws,  I still don't like the idea of a prenup.  If I think I need one, maybe I should not get married at all.  If I cannot trust the one I marry, then why bother.  However, I do like looking at this from another standpoint.  Your idea's on protecting assets can be very valuable for a family as a whole.  You can protect your wife and children if you have them.  That is great.  When you have money, there are a lot of people, besides mates of poor character, trying to get at it.

If you have  a second mortgage on your house through your off shore corporation, wouldn't the courts see this, thereby piercing the corporate vail and get at the asset anyway?

 

 

[TigerPaws]

If you have  a second mortgage on your house through your off shore corporation, wouldn't the courts see this, thereby piercing the corporate vail and get at the asset anyway?

Frank,

 In a number of countries U.S. courts have no jurisdiction and no way of establishing who actually owns the offshore company, so should the court ask for the corporate records they receive a polite no and there is nothing they can do about it. It is all in how you set up the offshore corporation(s) and or trust(s).

 As for a prenup, that is a personal issue which you will have to decide about, having one saved me more than you can imagine. Trust has nothing to do with it, trust is earned over a very long time and as a general rule I do not trust anyone. Of course if you would like to trust me with your life savings I would be happy to forward you an account number where you can transfer the funds.

[TigerPaws]

Why are you so sure:P??

YUP!

 

[Elen]

What?? I manged to scare a Tiger:D

[TigerPaws]

What?? I manged to scare a Tiger:D

Only in your wildest fantasy.

 

[wxman]

I like our law here in South Dakota where the man can sue the person who cheated with his wife. A few years ago a man won $300,000 by suing the man who broke up his marriage. Not only did the ex wife get nothing because she cheated and moved out, the other guy had to shell out a huge some of money. He appealed to the South Dakota Supreme court and lost there too. It also works the other way around too, where the wife can sue the mistress of her husband if he is cheating.

[TigerPaws]

I like our law here in South Dakota where the man can sue the person who cheated with his wife. A few years ago a man won $300,000 by suing the man who broke up his marriage. Not only did the ex wife get nothing because she cheated and moved out, the other guy had to shell out a huge some of money. He appealed to the South Dakota Supreme court and lost there too. It also works the other way around too, where the wife can sue the mistress of her husband if he is cheating.

Hum... Nice wxman but he only problem is living in South Dakota, too damn cold for me. Of course what if the woman moved to Nevada then filed for divorce, then you are stuck with Nevada laws.

 

[wxman]

You're right it is too damn cold here. In 5 years I'm going to a warmer climate, to another state with no income tax. At least there are still a few left in the warm climes, Texas, Florida and Nevada.

[Frank]

Tigerpaws,

Thanks for the info.  Really, can one trust the other countries the accounts are in?  As for trusting you.......nothing personal, but I don't know you.  As for trusting ones wife, I start to have second thoughts when reading the words of the women on this forum:D

Really, what is the best state for dealing with divorces, dividing up assets, etc?