Summary
One of the staple comments in this community is “don’t ever get married.” With all of the tales of divorce rape, it's a pretty fair piece of advice. But the fact that men have to be told to "not get married" is the exception that proves the rule; and that rule is that marriage is the default mindset.
Unlike the posts hallmarking the horror stories of marriage, this post will encourage you to develop a default mindset of "not marriage" by explaining exactly what marriage is, not from some social, psychological, or cultural perspective, but from a legal perspective by discussing some of the major benefits to marriage. This will give you some tools to analyze whether the legal rewards of marriage outweigh the potential risks in your situation.
Body
The legal benefits to marriage.
A comprehensive list of marriage benefits would be too lengthy to discuss, but there are three primary categories of benefits to being married: (1) Tax matters, (2) Inheritance matters, and (3) Miscellaneous satisfaction of requirements by a third-party.
1) Tax benefits are the number one benefit to being married. Married couples get a litany of tax benefits that single people do not get. Just to name a few big ones:
- Income Tax.
Say you’re a successful guy making $120k annually, and you’re living up the MGTOW lifestyle. As a single guy, your unadjusted income tax bracket puts you in the 28% tax category for that level of income. Now, your coworker Beta Bill makes just as much as you, and he just put a ring on Fat Sally. Fat Sally doesn’t earn an income at all. Merely by being married, Beta Bill’s income puts him in the 25% tax bracket (compared to your 28%). Now say that both you and Beta Bill get promoted, and y’all are each pulling in $200k. That bumps you into the 33% tax bracket, while Beta Bill is hanging out in the 28% tax bracket.
- Home Sale Exclusion.
You bought a house immediately after the 2008 crash when the market was at its lowest. Killer pad, you paid $150,000. You’ve lived in it for a couple years now, the market’s come back, and the neighborhood is booming. You sell that $150,000 home of yours for $500,000. Sweet, sweet delicious $350,000 profit. As a single guy, you’re allowed a $250,000 exclusion on the sale of the home. This means that, even though you made $350,000 on the sale of the house, you’re only going to be taxed as though you made $100,000 profit on the deal (because $350,000 profit - $250,000 exclusion = $100,000 taxable gain).
Beta Bill followed your example and bought a house in the same neighborhood at the same time you did, paying the same $150,000 you did, and he’s lived there with Fat Sally for just as long as you. But because life isn’t fair, Beta Bill was able to sell his house for $600,000, giving him a profit of $450,000.
So how much tax will he incur? …$0. That’s right. Not a goddamn cent. Why? Because married couples pair their exclusions, giving them a combined $500,000 exclusion for the sale of their home. $450,000 profit - $500,000 exclusion = less than $0 taxable gain. They bought the house for $150,000, sold it for $600,000, had a $450,000 profit, and didn’t pay a dime in taxes on it.
- Unlimited Spousal Transfers. (Caveat: this is a description of the current legal public policy, not my personal opinion.)
The general rule is that any transfer of property ownership, from one person to another, will incur a tax consequence. Meaning, for example, if you give your car to your brother as a gift, there is a tax consequence. If you hit the lottery and buy your parents a house, there is a tax consequence. The reason is because of estate taxes.
You see, public policy says that it sucks in the long term when wealth becomes super concentrated in the hands of the aristocracy for too long. After seeing the consequences of such behavior in British history, Americans decided to not let it happen here by creating estate taxes. The policy for estate taxes says “ok, your deceased father worked hard and made a lot of money. There are three options: (1) you’ll wisely invest/donate that money and become a contributing member of society; (2) since you didn’t earn that money, you’ll have no incentive to work, and you’ll become a socially worthless, noncontributing zero, holding up resources that could be used productively; or (3) you’ll use those resources for political purposes and fuck shit up for the rest of us. Since two out of three options are bad for society as a whole (as had been seen in much of British history), we’re going to tax your estate upon your death to prevent money from idly sitting in the hands of wealthy family dynasties.”
So to prevent wealthy people from saying “lulz, I’ll just give away all of my stuff to someone before I die, then I’ll have nothing that can be taxed,” the rules now include “ok faggot, if you give away more than $14,000 to someone (in 2015), then there will be tax consequences.” (Caveat: this is oversimplified. Estate and Gift Tax matters are much more complex than I’m explaining here.) So if you were to give a car to your brother (worth more than $14,000) or buy a house for your parents, you’d run into some tax issues.
But! If you’re married, you can transfer unlimited amount of value to your wife fo’ free. Buy her the house, buy her the Mercedes, buy her an island… it’s a tax-free transfer to your wife.
And generally when you die, estate tax matters apply when your stuff is going to be inherited by your family, your friends, and even your children; but estate tax matters will not apply when your wife inherits your assets.
2) Inheritance matters are another benefit to being married.
Let’s pretend you’re one of the many people who foolishly do not have a Last Will and Testament. When you die without a Will, you die “intestate.” That’s a fancy legal term for “dying without a Will.” Every state has a collection of statutes addressing intestacy. Basically, since your dumbass died without a Will, the state has a pseudo “default Will” that applies to everyone who died without a Will and dictates how your things will be handled after your death.
Well, standard intestacy provisions will say that much, if not all, of your assets will be given to your surviving spouse (which, if you’re keeping score, is tax-free). So if you don’t have a Will, then your spouse will inherit your stuff. If you don’t have a Will and you’re not married, then your stuff will be transferred to another family member.
Also of note, there’s such a thing as an “elective share.” So let’s say that you are married and you do have a Will, but since your wife is a total bitch, your Will says “All of my things go to my children. My wife, Fat Sally, doesn’t get a goddamn thing.”
Well, the problem here is history. In the past, women couldn’t vote, women couldn’t really own property, women couldn’t have jobs… women were super dependent on their husbands; and if their husband died and purposefully cut them out of the Will, then that woman would become dependent on the state. The state, in return, created a policy that basically said, “look guy, you created this problem and you’re not going to pawn that shit off on us to take care of her.”
So the elective share was born. If you cut your wife out of your Will or essentially give her a bad deal, the statutory elective share basically allows the surviving spouse the option to accept the deal in the Will or ignore the Will and instead collect half of the deceased spouse’s estate. So if you don’t have a Will, the surviving spouse will get the lion’s share of your stuff. If you do have a Will and you try to write her out, then she has the option by law to get half your shit anyway.
3) Miscellaneous stuff.
Many nongovernment organizations require you to be married to someone in order to extend benefits to them. Insurance is one example of this. If you have a solid insurance plan through your company and you wish to add your significant other to that policy to partake in those benefits, then the insurance company is going to have a requirement that y’all be married.
There are a bunch of stuff like this that, like adding someone to your cell phone plan, would make a service or benefit cheaper per person if the couple were to jointly belong. So for example, instead of each of you paying $100 per month for insurance (or whatever), you both would join up and pay a combined $150 (which is $75 each).
Another thing that you might encounter is hospital related emergencies. Many hospitals have a “family only” policy for certain circumstances, where if a husband were injured, then only the wife or a family member could see him. No girlfriends allowed.
So why do you want to get married?
Many horror stories are shared in this community about why you shouldn’t get married; but you need to take it one step further by asking why should you get married.
-
Are you interested in giving or receiving a transfer of property to or from your girlfriend during this year that’s in excess of $14,000, or could tally almost $5.5 million dollars over your lifetime? If yes, then maybe you should consider marriage. If not, then there’s no benefit to getting married here.
-
Are you about to sell a home you purchased and lived in for more than $250,000 above what you paid for it? If yes, then maybe marriage. If not, then no benefit.
-
Are you interested in saving a couple thousand dollars per year in income tax? If yes, then marriage. If not, then no marriage.
- Are you interested in possibly saving some money on insurance (or other benefits) or want to extend those benefits to your girlfriend? If yes, then marriage. If no, then no marriage.
Literally everything else discussed here that is a default benefit of being married can be contracted for in some way. For example, you can draft a Will right now to say that you want all of your stuff to go to your girlfriend, Sarah Sugartits. There literally is no law that says “only your wife is allowed to inherit _____.” So you can designate anyone under the Sun to receive your assets after you die.
This was done quite often for same-sex couples before the recent US Supreme Court case on gay marriage. Estate planning documents can be drafted to create just about all of the same benefits of marriage. The only problem was that if the person designated in your Will is not your spouse, they won’t enjoy the federal tax benefits. But those estate taxes really only kick in if you’ve got more than $5.43 million of assets. So, for the great majority of people, estate taxes don’t affect you.
Living Wills, Advanced Healthcare Directives, and Durable Powers of Attorney for Health and Financial Matters can all designate your girlfriend to do things for you if you’re in the hospital. And really, when the hospital asks if you or she is family, they don’t ask you to produce a series of birth certificates or marriage certificates just to visit someone in the hospital.
Conclusion
You’ve read the divorce rape stories, so you’re aware of the potential risks and costs associated with marriage. Now you’ve got a better understanding of the benefits of marriage. When analyzing the reality of marriage and divorce, you’re exchanging an ounce of benefit for a pound of risk; so it’s easy to give a blanket statement “don’t ever get married.”
But I’m not here to tell you that you should never get married. I’m here to give you some perspective of what marriage is as a matter of law and when it will benefit you. The truth is that marriage is not really designed to benefit you; it’s primarily designed to provide legal benefits to your family, particularly after your death. There are times when marriage is a prudent course of action; but for most people, the risks far outweigh the rewards.
So always remember to CYA: Cover Your Assets.

[deleted] 10y ago
Risk is a male birthright. It's fucking exciting to jump your bike off ramps you made out of shitty plywood and cinder blocks.
But there is a simple equation which every man should use to define the difference between risk and stupidity.
if benefit > risk then risk is fun. if benefit < risk then risk is stupidity.
the benefits of marriage < risks of marriage therefore marriage is stupidity for men.
I've found that the best way to stop a woman from pushing commitment or marriage is to ask her what she thinks marriage will be like? What are the risks? What are the benefits? What obligations will you have towards me in marriage? What obligations will I have towards you?
They never want to answer these questions and if the try they don't have good answers.
Marriage, like many things, is an emotional issue for women. It's the lottery of their life where they expect to get all kinds of good stuff but they don't really know what that entails. They just know they are entitled.
But ask them to qualify and quantify marriage and they hit a brick wall. At least, all the women I've asked have hit a brick wall.
Maybe some day I'll find that unicorn who has a clear idea of what is expected and is willing to invest just as much as me.
Ha, hahaha. I'm just kidding. That's never going to happen.
[deleted] 10y ago
I've found this to be true as well; to prevent an echo chamber I'm going to suggest that our shared experiences are limited perspectives.
Can anyone smarter than me find a study to make this notion more conclusive?
Darth_Pete 10y ago
You sir get a round of applause.
[deleted]
[deleted] 10y ago
Lol what do they say? I'm curious as to how they view it.
UrsusG 10y ago
I'm not that guy, but I've had a couple of my own 'marriage talks' with younger and older women, and I'll just sum it up: it doesn't matter what they say.
They'll try to shame you and make you feel bad for being 'a soulless materialist'
They'll make assurances they would never hurt you financially or emotionally, even if you fall out of love,
They'll get indignant that you're accusing them of gold digging
They'll say stuff like 'if you're already assuming our future marriage will fail, then that's what you want to happen'
and other assorted bullshit. It doesn't matter. Whatever they say is only valid in the moment of saying (and maybe for the next week or two until their hormones swing again)
Older women (40+) will probe you for your attitude to marriage, and if you let them know you understand how the world works, they'll just shut up about it. They know you know they know you know (etc) and there ain't nobody getting fooled.
IllimitableMan 10y ago
Yet she wants an all expenses paid party, vacation, and legal entitlement to your worldly possessions.
Hahahaha. They all say this shit. I swear it's LTR womanese or something. Basically, total bullshit. A woman scorned and all that.
Haha try and shame a guy for protecting his assets by being offended. I'd just laugh in her face it's so transparent.
I assume one day I'll die, so obviously, I must be suicidal. Great logic girl.
Yeah it's pure hamster talk. Women want to get married because it's the ultimate form of commitment, a safety net, they glamourise it since childhood and they have ZERO to lose whilst you have everything to LOSE. Hearing women shame men for not marrying is incredibly ironic. If the positions were switched, it'd be women who don't want to marry.
[deleted] 10y ago
The conversation doesn't last long.
It usually starts with them talking about how nice it would be to be married or how better the sex would be "if we were married".
She's dropping hints trying to manipulate me into asking her to marry her so I can make her happy.
I respond with, "Why do you want to get married?"
She gives some bullshit answer.
I specify, "What will you gain by marrying me. What will our roles be? What obligations will you have to me and I have to you?"
The last time I got that far she responded, "I don't know."
I said, "Don't you think those are things you should know before you decide that marriage is something you want to do?"
Then she huffs and complains that I'm making things difficult.
Then I say, "You should be able to talk to me about these things without fear and the same for me. For you to get mad at me because I want to know what's in your heart tells me you aren't ready to marry me."
Then she ends the conversation and wants to talk about something else because she can't make any headway.
Also, always be wary when women try to talk to you when your attention is divided. Women love to talk to a man while he's watching the football game or playing video games. His attention is divided and she can sit there and plant all kinds of ideas in your head or ask for things that normally you wouldn't agree to just to get her to go away.
Whenever a woman talks to me while I'm watching TV I immediately turn it off and look her dead in the eyes and engage in her conversation. You'd be surprised how many times they suddenly say, "Oh it's not important. I don't want to interrupt your TV or game."
If that was true she wouldn't have started a conversation in the first place.
[deleted]
sardinemanR 10y ago
This is a good writeup and the info is out there for people to take away from it.
But my takeaway is there is no point in getting married (and as you write, most of it you can contractually create anyway if you really wanted).
Perhaps an important addition to add is the effect of trusts and the protection irrevocable trusts give. The wealthy pretty much exclusively use trusts and capital gains to live off of, so they never actually worry about the tax rate issues or even inheritance taxes.
DarkExecutor 10y ago
If both you and your SO/wife/GF make something like 150k-200k combined, you will actually be better off tax-wise as separate. You as a single father, and her as a single mother (which gives her some nice tax benefits by the way).
Something to keep in mind if both of you are high earners.
Metalgear222 10y ago
Everytime I read these posts I feel so bad for my dad and brother (both married) these poor fucks don't even know. Both wives will leave with stealing half of their shit. I'm almost positive. I can see their wive's attitude and my dad and brothers ignorance to it.
Now that prenuptials are being overturned I'm not going to ever to get to experience having kids. Getting a vasectomy as soon as I can afford it.
NotRAClST2 10y ago
I like how you put it in a language where we can understand.
Aelius94 10y ago
A lot of guys will be serious trouble some-time in the near future. As marriage rates drop and divorce rates continue to rise the laws will have to seriously adapt to the outdated marriage concept. At least where I live this has started to happen. If you live with a woman for 6+ months you're basically treated as married. I'm not sure you get any of the above benefits but you'll certainly cop all of the negatives.
The information is useful to ensure you know of everything but there's almost no situation where even getting $250,000 outweighs the risks of marriage. It's a trap.
[deleted]
Easih 10y ago
probably.No problem here in Quebec,Canada since we went up to the supreme court for the cohabitation issue not that long ago and we won.
[deleted] 10y ago
Some of that math seems iffy at best..
The tax benefit for married couples only is a benefit if the wife isn't working , if both parties work many times that will the couple in a higher tax bracket.. If the wife doesn't work the taxes you save will be sucked up and then some since it costs much more to support a non working adult..
Making a profit on real estate, I would like to see the source where a married couple wouldn't have to pay taxes on 450k profit.. Which is highly unlikely to begin with, very few people can pull anywhere near that profit on a house unless they are a very very good flipper.
sweetleef 10y ago
Agreed. Frankly the original comment makes no sense.
the "benefit" doesn't compensate for the additional cost of supporting the wife; and if the wife works, there may be no "benefit" at all, and there is no accounting for the extra cost (in all forms, most prominently potential divorce) of having a wife, which are far greater than any tax savings.
The extra exclusion is hers, which means that it comes along with filing jointly and her having rights in the profit. His exclusion does not increase, the couple's is larger because it accounts for two people.
[deleted]
[deleted] 10y ago
The odds of gaining a $500k profit on the sale of a primary resident home is very very hard to do in most of the U.S. I would almost put that in the extreme case..
I realize there are a few benefits that get brought up, however, there are allot of costs that "pop up". I've heard several married guys say
" well, I don't know where my money goes "
As far as number 3. I've known someone (not to be specific) that became sick with cancer, so she opened joint accounts with her daughter..
RedBigMan 10y ago
In Canada if you live in a residence for 1 year before you sell it then capital gains don't apply whether you make $5,000 or $5,000,000.
DarkExecutor 10y ago
sounds like you'd lose so much money on the closing costs/selling costs anyway
MrJugsMcBulge 10y ago
Awesome post.
Just to add to the first point, married couples also pair their property transfer exclusions. A single person can only give $14,000 to another person each year without tax consequences, but a married person can give $28,000 to another person each year, because it's counted as both spouses each giving $14,000.
aazav 10y ago
Are you actually an attorney? I don't think you mentioned if you are or not.
RBuddDwyer 10y ago
Good overall summary with the general caveat that most of those issues are state specific, and may vary.
A more important difference is community property. If you live in a community property state (predominantly a few States in the the Southwest, California, and Louisiana) then category 2 is going to be completely different. You will probably wind up with roughly the same outcome, but the mechanics are entirely different.
[deleted] 10y ago
Solution: Find a RP male friend you trust, gay marriage. Enjoy the benefits while not actually getting married at all
KartagoPill 10y ago
We are people, we naturally betray for ourselves.
NiceKicksGabe 10y ago
I was actually thinking this the other day. No RP buddies tho.
Aelius94 10y ago
In theory that sounds good but it could potentially get messy.
[deleted]
NotRAClST2 10y ago
an adam sandler comedy movie was made about that
[deleted]
Overkillengine 10y ago
Basically, it give family massive incentive to fuck you over or even kill you.
[deleted] 10y ago
This really should be the top comment. I always have to find the good comments at the bottom.
Dear Reddit: your pimp game strong.
[deleted] 10y ago
Chess players have a concept called "hope chess." Hope chess is making a move which will work if you're opponent makes the move you really want them to but not if they play optimally. If they see the trick you're setting up then they can likely be in a better position than had you played the sound move. Can if end well? Yes, of course. Does it always? No. The reason you play the sound move isn't because you don't see the benefits of hope chess gone well. It's because you're okay with the standard position, even if you'd loooove the hope chess one, and you think that as a chess player you can muscle your way through from an okay position rather than hope to get lucky.
Marrying is hope chess. Women can, like my mother did, realize the powerful asset in front of her and abuse it. Taking half a man's shit and then being able to ride the CC, live with another man who she doesn't marry, travel, or do whatever the fuck she wants is honestly not always an unsound move for a woman. Sometimes, that's the best she's got so long as she doesn't have empathy for the husband. It's a legitimately good move to; alimony kicks ass for women. When red pillers say not to get married, we're not denying that hope chess can end well. The best possible game is a good marriage. Thing is, you've gotta get lucky. I see the benefits but I'm not willing to take that risk.
vengefully_yours 10y ago
The cost to me for two divorces was well over 10x what I saved in taxes. When she gets the house in the divorce and it's foreclosed with your name still on it, you're fucked, she isn't because her life doesn't depend on her credit rating, yours does to a far greater extent. The cost of alimony, child support, lawyers, and losing half your assets off the top, then being estranged from your kids while she poisons them is another consideration.
I married the second one so she could get health care. 16 months later she bails and fucks me over. Not worth the hassle and expense, bitch could have gotten half or more of everything I own after putting absolutely nothing in. She didn't because she knew how it affected me with the first one spawn camping my wallet. She knew if she tried to take my retirement, cars, or income all she would get is burned out hulks and my brain matter splattered all over the yard. Good luck getting anything from a memory bitch.
[deleted]
NightwingTRP 10y ago
One of the things which really hits home for me is a friend of mine who is younger than me (mid 20s) and he's finalising his divorce. The financial shit he's got to go through is just unbelievable. They'd barely been married two years... he seems to be turning into a natural MGTOW.
When I think about his woman... she pretty much played it perfectly because she's now got a consistent income that she doesn't have to work for... she's still hot and young and can hop back on the CC, plus security and benefits.
With that in mind... even though LTR unicorn hunter stuff advocates finding her young... you can still end up like my mate. (And his behaviour is fairly natural alpha.) A young first marriage is absolutely ideal for women... can she control herself to stick to the marriage or just be a richer version of her single self? It's such a bad societal situation.
vengefully_yours 10y ago
It's shortsighted for girls though, but they only think of right now and how much money they can get for nothing. It catches up with them, but we have to pay her for years, or decades, and it slows our progress considerably. Thanks to my first wife extorting from me for 14 years, I've been struggling. Couldn't keep any savings because the state would arbitrarily sieze my accounts as a punitive measure. Punish me for being male and getting divorced when it was entirely her idea. So I invested everything into my tools, shop equipment, cars, and parts. I have been running paycheck to paycheck the entire time after they made off with $10k and left me at zero. It took me years to build up that much, but one day to lose it. A year before I'm done paying her, the second one bails and takes the house, shop, a car, and leaves me with all the bills and her pets. Now I sold some cars, bought land, and I'm building my home and shop where no cunt can touch it. I will never marry again because starting over at 45 sucks, I'm not doing it again.
RPmatrix 10y ago
Indeed they do! Great analogy Cis
yaardi 10y ago
This. The perfect scenario would be to have a loving loyal wife and save taxes and be happy and all that, but the truth is marriage is very high risk endevour.
[deleted] 10y ago
If I bet on black 01, then I can get rich!
GuidoBandito 10y ago
After the horror of Marriage 1.0, there is no such thing as an upgrade to Marriage 2.0. I'm done. What's mine is mine and fuck her. Both literally and figuratively.
NotRAClST2 10y ago
in chinese there is a saying: ugly wife is a treasure at home
RedBigMan 10y ago
Yeah and in the past things like cheating were punished by not giving the cheating slut the house, car and half the man's shit because the assumption was she found another man so he can look after her.
We should abandon this notion that women get half of everything because the reality of the situation is that man and women both have to work to survive these days. So she can get off her ass and get a job at Wal-Mart if she wants to get her nails done as opposed to getting vaginamony.
Aelius94 10y ago
This would be nice but this is living in a 'fair' world and that's not how it works. The world is designed around how women's brains work. Men simply adapt because most of them will do anything for a chance at regular sex. The small minority like us who want none of it are a small statistic so nothing is going to change to please us. We just have to adapt to ensure we have awesome lives.
muuh-gnu 10y ago
Half of the votes "we" have are female votes. They wont vote to their own detriment and so will neither their leftist BBs nor their Chads. The percentage of RP/DE/NRx-aware people that do not actually want this is pretty small.
"We" basically lost the game not the moment we allowed womens suffrage, but when we allowed democracy. Democracy begets "social" wealth redistribution, and social wealth redistribution begets AFBB and 20/80. As soon as you realize that your offspring cant starve from neglect and youre a Hi-SMV male, it pays off for both you and women if you inseminate as many of them as you can and offload the child rearing cost onto somebody else. An Hi-SMV male trying to lead a k-selection life in an r-environment will pay a high opportunity cost.
RedBigMan 10y ago
Well the Chad's might... I mean all it takes is one woman to nail him for child support and there you go a good deal of his fun time gets taken away by daddy government taking his money and giving it to slutty sally who decided to keep the baby hoping to ensnare Chad.
muuh-gnu 10y ago
The existence of the 20/80 distribution skewed in Chad's favor indicates that in practice, the women will not nail him for child support, but go for BB-paid "safety net" welfare instead.
Slutty sally wants chad's genes, not his money, which he might not even have. She either has a BB under her control directly, or indirectly through welfare.
Screenp2 10y ago
tax break my ass.. last year our combined income put us up a bracket, we lost some deductions, lost our kid credit from the state and ended up owing almost $5k in taxes between fed and state when the prior year we got back 4.5k.. all because I make 18k more than last year.
Ifuckinglovepron 10y ago
You forgot one of the most important benefits to marriage: child rearing.
Until I plan to have children, I do not believe in marriage.
But there is no other way to as successfully ensure a good life to your child than to have a wife.
If you try to have a child out of wedlock you are even more fucked and at the will of the woman and the state.
unassumingusername7 10y ago
Get a surrogate. If you want, get a nanny, a maid, and a personal chef, too. Still cheaper than marriage.
That way only one person has custody. There's no compromise, no risk, no dancing around keeping her happy so she doesn't take the kids and poison them against you.
Every time anybody says not to get married, we have these in the closet blue pills come and insist that they can't have kids without marriage. Bullshit. Be willing to take control of your life. Don't get married.
Ifuckinglovepron 10y ago
What you propose is absurd.
TRP is primarily dating strategies, but as field reports have shown it can also work for LTR's and occasionally, gasp, marriages.
It is not only my Southern Conservative views that say the optimal way to raise a healthy, well adjusted child is within a healthy marriage. Science and human history have proven this is true.
While AWALT, not all women cannot be conditioned to be a good and faithful wife. This falls on the man's ability to mold her, and depends on her upbringing.
Many "natural" alphas you mave have met, come from solid, tow parent homes. This sub is generally populated by the offspring of single mothers who did have the chance to internalize the correct way to act because they did not have a solid model growing up.
JDD87 10y ago
Dont know why this isnt higher. You can't really reproduce well outside of marriage. If reproduction isn't the goal, why are we trying to have all this sex all the time?
Sure you can have multiple baby mommas and do it that way, or just knock up a girl without marrying her, but the 'good stock' (girls that have high SMV) will not skip the birth control without a ring on.
What's the better alternative for actually passing on your genes to a not-totally-fucked-up kid?
CounterTony 10y ago
Came here to say this. Have an upvote.
TheMGhandi 10y ago
Overall, that 100k you might save isn't worth the $1M that goes into the divorce/alimoney/CS/lawyers. To me, it sounds like you just want more people married to make money off of.
BobBobCan 10y ago
I've always found Robert Greene's point of view about Exit strategy(Chapter 22 in 33 Strategies Of War) to be perfectly applied to the constitution of marriage:
”The great German general Erwin Rommel once made a distinction between a gamble and a risk. Both cases involve an action with only a chance of success, a chance that is heightened by acting with boldness. The difference is that with a risk, if you lose, you can recover: your reputation will suffer no long-term damage, your resources will not be depleted, and you can return to your original position with acceptable losses. With a gamble, on the other hand, defeat can lead to a slew of problems that are likely to spiral out of control. With a gamble there tend to be too many variables to complicate the picture down the road if things go wrong. The problem goes further: if you encounter difficulties in a gamble, it becomes harder to pull out--you realize that the stakes are too high; you cannot afford to lose. So you try harder to rescue the situation, often making it worse and sinking deeper into a hole that you cannot get out of. People are drawn into gambles by their emotions: they see only the glittering prospects if they win and ignore the ominous consequences if they lose. ”Taking risks is essential; gambling is foolhardy. It can be years before you recover from a gamble, if you recover at all.”
Overkillengine 10y ago
"If you try to beat the odds, make sure you can survive the odds beating you." -random darkly hilarious demotivator poster I saw years ago.
finitepistabole 10y ago
I'm curious. Is there any circumstances where some marriage benefits would get voided at a state or federal level in the united states?
[deleted] 10y ago
I would assume standard. defrauding or illegal activity void contracts... but so long as you didn't become an anchor husband, probably not.
at least not without a good lawyer
beginner_ 10y ago
Even if it is obvious but for non Americans this may not apply.
For example in my country depending on the state you life in you are actually worse of in taxes when marrying. Because in some cases they add incomes together meaning you get in very high brackets very quickly. In other states they have a better approach like taking the mean income. But all in all you are worse of.
So basically even less reason to get married.
CowardlyPetrov 10y ago
Good post, but I don't think this is true. You won't be paying it in tax to the government, but you will be paying it, possibly more, in "wife tax".
SilkTouchm 10y ago
What about getting a marriage with a bussiness partner in order to enjoy all these benefits?
jimjackjoe 10y ago
yep gay marriage is legal everywhere now. just marry your bro and reap the benefits. cut Fat Sally out of the equation.
rcglinsk 10y ago
Weirdly this benefit is far more important for gay couples (kids cost a shit load of money). The lady who died in Windsor had like a $6-$7 million estate. `
scrantonic1ty 10y ago
Just one nitpick:
So really you don't get the full 3-5% tax benefits in their entirety, you've still got to support the fat lazy consumer sitting on your sofa all day.
dr_warlock 10y ago
The legal obligation cancels out the tax advantage.
always-be-closing 10y ago
If I've that much capital at risk, I'm still not risking it in marriage to save some of it from taxation.
http://www.npr.org/2012/06/19/154860588/single-dads-by-choice-more-men-going-it-alone
http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2013/nov/02/men-single-dad-father-surrogacy-adoption
http://news.yahoo.com/via-surrogacy-men-opt-become-single-dads-182314847.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/06/health/06seco.html?_r=0
http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2010/apr/03/sex-selection-babies
http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/medical_examiner/2012/09/sex_selection_in_babies_through_pgd_americans_are_paying_to_have_daughters_rather_than_sons_.html
I'm only 24, but along with my IRA and a small investment account, I'm earmarking money for a donor egg/surrogacy+IVF.
I know I want to have children, and I know it will be easier for myself to raise sons, spaced out, fit to when I am earning more and better capable of hiring the babysitters and the maids.
If I happen to be in a position to marry, with a real prenup - -- or even better: a contract drawn up that isn't a marital one - - - a unicorn (peak fertility, virgin, good relationship with father, articulates RP ideology about gender relations, child raising skills via babysitting/dealing with siblings, can cook, intelligent, kind, etc.)
Yeah.
Will totally consider it.
But looking at the math and the numbers on longterm nanny-costs, IVF+surrogacy and donor costs.....
.....seems more and more likely that before I'm 40, I'll be able to have two sons who are kept fed and cleaned, taken back and forth between home and school, with meals cooked and their home cleaned without legally marrying, or, socially committing to one woman.
It'll only be from newborn to around 12 that they should require so much fawning attention anyway.
I was doing my own chores around 10, first job at 16, and nothing insane happened to me. My older sibling helped me (four years older) with many things that I helped my own younger sibling out with (three years younger), and we did just fine - - though obviously we loved then and do now in retrospect, the fact that we had a stay-at-home Mom.
Ideally, I'd love to give my children a Mother, but no matter what, I want to make them stronger than their old man; fitter, better, smarter, harder-working.
A divorce and custody fight would destroy that.
But surrogacy/donor/IVF can still give me children before I am old.
[deleted]
DistantWinter 10y ago
You are thinking about this logically and correctly. Another person here advocates this. At first I disagreed and kept my opinion to myself. After taking time to think about it this is the best solution to having children without playing Russian Roulette with the mother.
There are hidden gems that having children with a women you LTR or marry that people don't talk much about or is not taken into account until it's too late. These are things you know might happen, but you don't really believe that it will.
Things like parental alienation, various abuse charges, inability to move due to parental obligations, no ambition to increase your earnings, if you are lucky - seeing your child 50% of the time, emotional and mental damages due to other people and events in the childs life you have no control over, constant change of homes, verbal and emotional abuse from your child post divorce, the pain you feel seeing them go through it all, etc... The list goes on and on and it has been covered here. There are huge industries created to profit from all the damage done by divorce to children and yourself. Divorce has a very large ripple effect that lasts forever.
You can give the children a mother, but if she decides to bail she cannot take them with her. If she becomes abusive to them you have every right to remove her from your childs life. You have no idea how big of a positive this is in just your life alone. Two gay men can raise children successfully so can one single man with a girlfriend.
You have effectively removed multiple chaotic variables that will cure all of the negatives that comes with divorce to the child by using surrogacy/donor/IVF. This is the answer.
always-be-closing 10y ago
And what's more - I had the stay at home Mother, devoted wife to her Husband, who was my hardworking Father.
I do as best as I can to live up to the standards set by men of my Father's generation. I see very few women who bother being anything like the women of my Mother's generation.
yummyluckycharms 10y ago
I might be the guy that you're thinking of, but in any case, I have been advocating for surrogacy for guys ever since my friend did it with great success. As you have highlighted, it brings the same benefits and mitigates much of the risk
Just dont get it done in the west - get it done in India and SE asia which have well established industries already
[deleted]
BradLightningRooster 10y ago
Would it really be so bad if they grew up seeing that their father enjoyed an abundance of women?
My grandfather and father were both beta as fuck and I have seen their lives ruined by women. I learned from them what NOT to do, bit I have never had an example of what to do in life.
It seems toe that being raised by a single RP father would set a guy up to succeed. The father would have to work very hard to teach his son how to protect himself though so he doeant fuck shit up in his early life. One $0.50 piece of rubber is all that separates you from 18 yrs of slavery.
DarkExecutor 10y ago
What happens if you have a daughter?
sardinemanR 10y ago
Just go to another country and live there instead. Money goes further and the QOL is as good or better if you have any money.
The US is a gynocracy, there is no actual way to protect yourself.
sweetleef 10y ago
Maybe, if you're filthy rich and move to a 3rd world shithole, but then you have to fortress yourself off from the population, and you and your kids have to live in a shithole.
As for W. Europe, the tax/inheritance/property/labor systems there make the US seem like a libertarian dream. And they are orders of magnitude worse in the gyno-centricity department.
always-be-closing 10y ago
It's mainstream socio-political culture having gone insane, I retain a pride in the ideals and history of the United States of America.
My sons will be Americans, though they may have to be born to a surrogate abroad.
Sure, but the quality of life may not be the same, and I wouldn't want my own children to grow to be culturally alien to me.
Varies, varies.
I currently live in Manhattan, and I have seen (and enjoyed) some of the worst hypergamy imaginable.
But I'm from way out in the country, and I still see in 2015, a big difference in lifestyle and culture.
[deleted] 10y ago
[deleted]
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^0.3326
AllCircuitTeam105 10y ago
This is such bullshit
There should not be a single tax
Flaye2 10y ago
It looks like the risks far outweigh the benefits in scale that these benefits may as well not be there.
Don't get married.
[deleted] 10y ago
Gift-splitting is another marriage benefit. If you're married (and your wife agrees to it) you can make annual tax-free transfers of $28,000 to your brother.
[deleted] 10y ago
This has probably been brought up before, but what prevents me from finding another (straight) dude who wants to save money and getting gay married for tax benefits?
[deleted]
Squeezymypenisy 10y ago
Didn't they want to do this in how I met your mother? We are in for a weird future. Probably more adoptions as well for those who still want kids. Or live in nannies. Imagine women fighting over getting to nanny of 2 straight male's kids because they pay well and all you do is look after them. At least until security/nannybots are built.
DarkExecutor 10y ago
Wrong. Marriage penalty tax will hurt you tax-wise if you make 170k combined.
RedBigMan 10y ago
Exactly. Remember the original definition of marriage traditionally was:
The father stops being the provider for his female offspring in exchange he pays the husband (dowry, which often included expensive and/or family heirloom items of strong sentimental value) to take her off his hands and provide for her. Her part in the contract was to basically spread her legs and pop out an heir for the husband.
If a woman was found to be not a virgin (and was advertised as such) or a cheating slut then the husband could divorce her and keep the dowry and now the father was back stuck as provider once more so most women didn't do that shit it controlled their hypergamy because they couldn't afford to lose their husband.
I was one of the ones suggesting two straight dudes pulling the gay-married thing for the tax bennies. After all bigamy is illegal and if you are already married to your best friend or whatever then marriage by adhesion (IE. common-law) would be difficult or impossible since you can argue that you already have a legal marriage contract in place. Doesn't matter if slut was at your house for 5 years banging you every night.
RPAlternate42 10y ago
If I could do it all over again, I'd not get married and marry a bro the first chance I got.
"Let's get married." "Can't... I'm already married to Steven!" "But you don't love him like you do me!" "Exactly."
dr_warlock 10y ago
The father gives up his daughter for adoption.
yaardi 10y ago
Anyway, who gets to divorce rape in a gay marriage?
Squeezymypenisy 10y ago
That is the golden question that is either currently or about to start making its way through the court system. It may take awhile, but after going to the highest courts you will see an answer.
[deleted]
[deleted] 10y ago
Yea but are you ready to deal with the social implications of everyone assuming you are gay? lol..
[deleted] 10y ago
Why wold anyone know? Getting married doesn't need to be public, nor does it requine cohabitation. I think the fee is 25$ to just get officially registered as a couple, maybe more but not much more.
[deleted] 10y ago
yea but what happens when they want a divorce? do they get half of your shit?
[deleted] 10y ago
If they make a similar income, no.
DarkExecutor 10y ago
Marriage penalty tax will hurt you tax-wise if you make like 170k combined.
[deleted] 10y ago
What about more than 170k? I'm looking at 100k or so starting salary out of college so do you know if I paired with a similar income whether that would help tax evasion?
DarkExecutor 10y ago
its not tax evasion if you never get married. you just sorta get married in church, but never by the state. stay separate legally, but live together. also yes, anything above 170k combined income and you start paying more in taxes in marriage than you would as individuals.
[deleted] 10y ago
I mean in the case of getting married by the state.
Wow that makes no sense. Why would anyone get married if they make jack shit....
well-ok-then 10y ago
If you both make money there aren't many tax benefits
[deleted] 10y ago
Yeah that's the main problem.
Overkillengine 10y ago
That, and if she is not employed, supporting a dependent outweighs the tax break.
So either way, it's a net loss for a man to marry. Better off not even cohabiting to force her to support herself or find some chump to pay her bills while you dick her.
[deleted] 10y ago
I'm only considering marriage to another man for tax reasons, don't worry haha. If it isn't a tax plus then single it is.
well-ok-then 10y ago
If your employer gives "free" health insurance to your "spouse" that can work if one of you is self employed. Of course that's a silly system. If your employer gives free groceries or cell phone to spouse it works too (but they don't because it doesn't make sense) The real plus side might be that it would be a speed bump if either of you decided to marry a chick
[deleted] 10y ago
[deleted]
[deleted] 10y ago
It would be a friend. Maybe your life is so shit that you don't have anyone you can trust, but some of us have actual friends.
[deleted] 10y ago
[deleted]
[deleted] 10y ago
I will. I hope I'll never be in circumstances to be as cynical of trust as you.
DarkExecutor 10y ago
And yet here you are in TRP. Already not trusting 50% of people on the planet.
[deleted] 10y ago
Well that's why I'd do it with a trusted male friend.
Not trusting the collective doesn't mean you can't trust individuals if you don't have anyone in your life who you can trust to the end you should seek help imo.
ZioFascist 10y ago
yup..id rather be in a different tax bracket than have to deal with all the BS and risks of marriage. SPending an extra 5K a year in taxes is alot cheaper than divorce rape
FortunateBum 10y ago
Shit, just the lowball average of what people spend on weddings is 20K. Not to mention, any money she makes is hers and any money you make is the family's. You will be supporting the family and she will be saving for her post-divorce nest egg.
From a financial perspective, I can't see marriage having ANY benefits whatsoever. The tax breaks are nothing compared to what you'll be spending even if you don't get divorced.
nolightspared 10y ago
There's also the consumer aspect of it. Most women I've dated are worse shoppers than me and much bigger consumers.
ZioFascist 10y ago
most women have no concept of reality or the future. they're always living in the now
TheSliceman 10y ago
Yes. OP doesn't quantify or at least give a ballpark estimation of the dollar amount lost from supporting someone.
The measly few K saved from marriage is massively outweighed by the 10-20 K a year LOST by having a dependent.
[deleted] 10y ago
[deleted]
TheSliceman 10y ago
Let's be fair, nowadays most men are totally incapable of managing money either.
ZioFascist 10y ago
indeed. feminisim has completely destroyed the family unit and its leading to the demise of civilization
Jarnskeggi 10y ago
Great read, thank you.
Folks also need to be careful of De-Facto partner laws. These can apply just from being in a LTR with a person and living with them for X time, and cause most of the problems of marriage, at least here in Australia
Easih 10y ago
doesnt apply here in Quebec,Canada :) we went up to the supreme court for this issue since its very common to live together for years outside of marriage here.
DarkLordoftheShit 10y ago
This analysis is great. Get this shit on the sidebar.