And yet if you bring up any of this, how men are financially/emotionally/psychologically raped in family courts, you're instantly labeled an MRA and the issue is dismissed entirely.

And people still have the nerve to shout hollow shit like "smash the patriarchy". Society can be quite sickening

> men treated like sources of money with little other value

Yeah, it's disgusting. It makes men feel worthless and expendable.

> It would be quite educational for all men to attend family court as an observer prior to marriage.

Absolutely. I did exactly that. I could not believe what I was seeing at first. Could fill up this entire thread with stories.

> Absolutely. I did exactly that. I could not believe what I was seeing at first. Could fill up this entire thread with stories.

Please share at least one!

I remember one story from a lawyer I dated. The woman accused her ex-husband of abuse. Recently divorced and with eyes on custody of the children, so there was a high likelihood of the accusation being false. This isn't just my opinion either, this is what the court's appointed criminal psychologists say based on their experience.

The man was arrested, removed from his home based on the word of his ex-wife. After some lengthy court proceedings, he was released pending further trial on the condition he not approach her in the meantime.

He tried to go home but she was still there. He couldn't go in because of the court order. His home, and he can't go inside without being arrested. She had absolutely no rights to the house since it had been purchased prior to marriage. Despite this, his lawyers tried to negotiate with the woman, to no avail. She simply refused to leave. Apparently there was no way to evict her either.

At some point the situation must have pissed off the lawyers because they got sick of negotiating and started straight up maneuvering. They waited until she left his residence, moved him back inside and changed the locks. When she tried to come back, she couldn't.

Wish I knew what happened after that. All I was told was that her life became a lot harder afterwards.

>If you have much to do with family court you'd fully understand why suicide is a way out for men treated like sources of money with little other value.

That depends on the country. But if I'd live in US I wouldn't marry without a prenuptial agreement.

In plenty of places, you don't even want to live with someone too long without a pre-nuptial agreement and even then the law can cancel those agreements.

You can also take preventive measures, establish an offshore company and move all your assets on that. Move money in off-shore accounts. If you have nothing under your name, nothing can be taken from you.

...but I only met her last night for a beer and dinner, you mean I have to set up an international group of companies to protect my stereo, fancy dining table and car? Yes, son. Otherwise you'll lose everything. Here's a list of firms that can help...

What a world we live in. I doubt nothing you wrote but the steps that lead to your understanding seem as difficult as my own. Society is truly a mess.

Always was

The IRS might look at this strategy differently, and they might have more resources than your (ex) partner.

Fortunately the IRS is not involved in judgements from non-tax courts.

The IRS does not care about what structure you use, they only care about compliance. It is very useful to reframe your understanding of the IRS. They are not really adversaries, they will even help you set up this stuff even though they are aware it undermines their own name of revenue. Remember, its only Congress that cares and even then they are pretending. The perception of the IRS comes from most people's interaction with the IRS: retroactive enforcement of a penalty at the least convenient time. Leading cash-poor people to want to hide from the IRS, leading to greater vulnerability.

By reporting taxes to the IRS or filing reports to the Treasury (their parent agency), yes, it may seem counterintuitive that you are associating yourself with additional properties to the literal government. But that doesn't inherently create consequences to other branches of the government, judges, or private creditors, it also doesn't mean they those other parties get to know about it.

Finally, one last thing to remember, obfuscating the existence or movement of money is not illegal. Its another reason why the IRS doesn't care about anyone's convoluted structure of companies and trusts around the world, because they are not illegal and neither are most transactions between them. A money laundering charge, for example, requires an illicit origin of funds. So it can only be a tacked on charge after the government has discovered the origin and the origin was illicit. As such, using your own legally earned money post-tax money and sheltering it in a convoluted way garners no issue from the IRS. And if it earns a little bit, you can still report and pay taxes on it. Also, the new thing in this century is that you also don't need a bank account to hold liquid assets under these organization's names, therefore nuking the Treasury/FinCEN report of foreign bank accounts when that was part of the strategy.

Damn. This guy divorces.

Nah, just disappointed that I haven't shown up in the Paradise Papers yet.

In most states prenups only apply to assets you had before marriage.

This, and nothing prevents an ex-spouse to "challenge" the prenup. If you are the wealthier one, you will have to pay for your ex attorney's fees on top of yours. Lawyers on both sides will play this game, filing motion and racking up your bills until the wealthier spouse (usually the men is completely dried up).

See the current case of Dr. Dre which has to pay $1.5M of his wife's attorneys fees as she is challenging their prenup : https://www.complex.com/music/dr-dre-ordered-to-pay-1-millio...

For Dr. Dre who is a billionaire it is a painful lesson. For most of the average middle class men, you will end up broke sleeping in your car. Bitter women can use this "scorched earth technique" as a revenge because they know that at the end of the battle, once all the family's assets have been spent on lawyers, the wife will still get spouse and child support as a safety net.

It also only applies to assets you held before not including appreciation. So if you were bold enough to hold crypto from 2012, got married in 2015, and got divorced this year… bye bye all your money.

> They might reconsider marriage as an institution altogether.

While I dont disagree with your statements, the statistics don't lie.

Men in marriage live longer and healthier lives on average to men in long-term relationships and to single men.

Or are healthy, well-adjusted men just more likely to end up married?

Yes thats true. Also if you live alone and slip in shower there might be no one to notice and help you etc. There is no easy answers with anything to do with sociology.

> Men in marriage live longer and healthier lives on average to men in long-term relationships and to single men.

What a blanket statement. Does that apply to every married man, without fail? What about women? Do married women live longer and healthier lives too? If so, why do they file for divorce?

>Does that apply to every married man, without fail?

Not sure if you understand what average means.

If average couple has 1.7 children I can assure you you wont be able to find 0.7 of a child enrolled to any preschool.