Husband won't put me on title for new home

[soserious1]

I like this idea.

 

How would you handle, for example, a husband wanting the wife to be a SAHM?

 

I wouldn't do.. it would be a relationship deal breaker.. every able bodied adult in this house works or they GTFO.

 

Nobody should ask another person to take a career hit that will be life long & from which they will never recover. If people want children BOTH parents should be willing to accept the career hit that comes with that choice. Both mom AND dad working at family friendly companies, taking turns using sick days to care for ill children etc. They can also choose to work opposing shifts for a few short years, both parents equally taking their turns at providing hands on child rearing & both parents taking their turn at going out to work to earn the money the family needs.

Edited March 27, 2012 by soserious1

[Black Jack]

I wouldn't do.. it would be a relationship deal breaker.. every able bodied adult in this house works or they GTFO.

 

Exactly, with the exception of being being medically inept or preggers.

[soserious1]

Exactly, with the exception of being being medically inept or preggers.

 

Pregnant women can work unless they've been ordered to bed by their Doctor. You have the baby, both parents take child care leave and when that time is up, both parents up & back to work while also sharing equally in child rearing duties.

 

Pregnancy is NOT an illness & it isn't a golden ticket entitling a woman to 50% or better of every dollar a man earns for the rest of his life!

[Black Jack]

Pregnant women can work unless they've been ordered to bed by their Doctor. You have the baby, both parents take child care leave and when that time is up, both parents up & back to work while also sharing equally in child rearing duties.

 

Pregnancy is NOT an illness & it isn't a golden ticket entitling a woman to 50% or better of every dollar a man earns for the rest of his life!

 

Never said it was an illness or an excuse. I'm just being realistic about women having babies. As long as she gets back to work after resting that is fine with me if she takes a few months off.

[soserious1]

Never said it was an illness or an excuse. I'm just being realistic about women having babies. As long as she gets back to work after resting that is fine with me if she takes a few months off.

 

BOTH parents should have leave when a new baby arrives, not just mommy!

 

If a woman wishes to take more than the standard 6 week leave advised medically to recover from birth, then Mommy can save up her extra money so that she can cover her 50% share of household expenses during her extra weeks of leave.

Edited March 27, 2012 by soserious1

[Black Jack]

BOTH parents should have leave when a new baby arrives, not just mommy!

 

I agree, but I won't be the one taking a lot of time off as she will. She'll be the one who will need to rest and regain her strength.

 

If a woman wishes to take more than the standard 6 week leave advised medically to recover from birth, then Mommy can save up her extra money so that she can cover her 50% share of household expenses during her extra weeks of leave.

 

I agree.

[Mme. Chaucer]

This is "MY" house, why should anybody expect that they should be able to have run of the place without paying a single dime?

 

Is anyone suggesting that you should allow this, or that anyone should expect it of you?

 

I have never lived ANYWHERE that I didn't have to write a check every month for. I would NEVER dream of moving into a home owned by a man without knowing what fair market value rents were in his area & writing him a check every month for my housing costs. At the very minimum, I'd offer to give him a the same amount I was currently paying for my rent.

 

That's very clear, and admirably equitable. My problem with your posts on this thread is that you expect everyone to agree that your approach to a marital style partnership is the only "right" way, and you castigate them if they don't.

 

The key is that both people need to be on the same page about this stuff, and if they are not (like the OP and her husband), they will need to work on getting on the same page, or their marriage is in trouble.

 

It's not all about somebody getting screwed. It's about creating and supporting a viable marriage. For me, and many of us, at least.

[jwi71]

SS1,

 

I can sympathize with much you write as I had an xWW clean me out.

With many tenets you post I agree at least in principal if not always execution.

And I say the following with no malice:

You sound very hurt, angry and scared. Perhaps consider IC to help work through it.

 

I hope you can, once again, regain trust and faith in others. Those are the foundations of happy and healthy relationships on life, platonic or romantic.

[Mme. Chaucer]

BOTH parents should have leave when a new baby arrives, not just mommy!

 

If a woman wishes to take more than the standard 6 week leave advised medically to recover from birth, then Mommy can save up her extra money so that she can cover her 50% share of household expenses during her extra weeks of leave.

 

Or, her husband can cover the finances during this time, if they both like this solution.

 

Or, if the husband wants to be "Mr. Mom" (like my first husband was for a while), the wife can bring home the bacon. Like I did.

 

Your way is not the only way. You have some good ideas, but I don't think that obsessively picking every component of a marital type relationship into minuscule bits so that absolute equality in EVERY ASPECT is achieved is ever going to end up doing anything besides … leaving the relationship in minuscule shreds.

[soserious1]

Is anyone suggesting that you should allow this, or that anyone should expect it of you?

 

 

That's very clear, and admirably equitable. My problem with your posts on this thread is that you expect everyone to agree that your approach to a marital style partnership is the only "right" way, and you castigate them if they don't.

 

 

Please, I get "castigated" on a regular basis here for my unwillingness to share my assets in a relationship. Nasty things are attributed to my character, I'm regularly warned about how I'll be "undermining" a relationship if I'm not willing to fork over the bucks. I'm told what a horrible, selfish person I am for refusing to allow a man to live here rent free simply because I own the place.

 

People here are more than good at also dishing it out & I fail to see why they need you to defend them.

[soserious1]

SS1,

 

I can sympathize with much you write as I had an xWW clean me out.

With many tenets you post I agree at least in principal if not always execution.

And I say the following with no malice:

You sound very hurt, angry and scared. Perhaps consider IC to help work through it.

 

I hope you can, once again, regain trust and faith in others. Those are the foundations of happy and healthy relationships on life, platonic or romantic.

 

I did go to IC for several months, had a male counselor who blathered on & on about how I need to be brave & "display trust" by opening myself to the possibility of fiscally helping & supporting a future partner as part of the "relationship cost" that I should willingly accept & pay.

 

My answer to all this? "when hell freezes over"

[johan]

Or, her husband can cover the finances during this time, if they both like this solution.

 

Or, if the husband wants to be "Mr. Mom" (like my first husband was for a while), the wife can bring home the bacon. Like I did.

 

Your way is not the only way. You have some good ideas, but I don't think that obsessively picking every component of a marital type relationship into minuscule bits so that absolute equality in EVERY ASPECT is achieved is ever going to end up doing anything besides … leaving the relationship in minuscule shreds.

 

I agree with this. But I think soserious just isn't open to thinking about relationships like that, because she judges the risk to be too high. She's unwilling even to go so far as to put herself in someone else's shoes and even entertain the idea that equity can be measured in ways other than money. Maybe because that would open up some other related issues she would have to face at the same time. Who knows.

 

There is nothing to be gained from beating her down and forcing her to admit the solution she describes might lead to more problems than solutions. She isn't all that interested in getting involved with someone again anyway. But she also indicated above that things are not quite so black and white as she tends to describe them. I hope for the best for her regardless.

 

I agree with her that equity is important in a relationship. I don't measure things only in terms of money.

[soserious1]

Your way is not the only way. You have some good ideas, but I don't think that obsessively picking every component of a marital type relationship into minuscule bits so that absolute equality in EVERY ASPECT is achieved is ever going to end up doing anything besides … leaving the relationship in minuscule shreds.

 

Well, if a relationship cannot have "absolute equality" I would rather that the relationship end up in "minuscule shreds" preferably long before a divorce court judge is ripping my assets into shreds in order to turn them over to a so called "loving husband"

[Mme. Chaucer]

Please, I get "castigated" on a regular basis here for my unwillingness to share my assets in a relationship. Nasty things are attributed to my character, I'm regularly warned about how I'll be "undermining" a relationship if I'm not willing to fork over the bucks. I'm told what a horrible, selfish person I am for refusing to allow a man to live here rent free simply because I own the place.

 

People here are more than good at also dishing it out & I fail to see why they need you to defend them.

 

Really, I'm defending myself. I don't agree that your way is the only way, and I strongly believe that one goal of feminism was to provide opportunities for EVERYONE to make choices rather than to be bound by traditional gender roles. I have not embraced a traditional gender role in most aspects of marriage, but I could have chosen to. AS LONG AS MY PARTNER WAS CONSCIOUSLY MAKING THE COMPLEMENTARY CHOICE.

 

Maybe I have not read every post you've made, but honestly I cannot recall EVER seeing you get reamed for not wanting to share your assets in a relationship. Or, ever seeing even a suggestion that you should "allow" a man to live with YOU rent free.

 

People are getting on your case because you are insulting everyone who does, in fact, "allow" their partner to live in the house "rent free." Or who believe (as I do) that earning money is NOT the main prize that a person brings to a union.

 

AND I WAS THE SOLE / MAIN (circumstance fluctuated over the years) EARNER IN MY FIRST MARRIAGE, AND AM NOW THE FAR BIGGER ASSET HOLDER IN THIS MARRIAGE.

 

Caps so you don't mistake me for someone who is a "freeloader."

 

But my husband is NOT a "freeloader" either.

 

Your insistence that he must be, or that I must be getting taken for a ride, is insulting.

[soserious1]

 

I agree with her that equity is important in a relationship. I don't measure things only in terms of money.

 

Bully for you, tell you what, send me your address, I'll gladly send all the gold diggers I come across in your direction. Hope you have a BIG house, there are rather a lot of them.

[johan]

Bully for you, tell you what, send me your address, I'll gladly send all the gold diggers I come across in your direction. Hope you have a BIG house, there are rather a lot of them.

 

You can send them my way if you want, but I don't associate with gold diggers.

[Black Jack]

I agree with this. But I think soserious just isn't open to thinking about relationships like that, because she judges the risk to be too high. She's unwilling even to go so far as to put herself in someone else's shoes and even entertain the idea that equity can be measured in ways other than money. Maybe because that would open up some other related issues she would have to face at the same time. Who knows.

 

And this is coming from the person who only sees relationships as another ATM.

 

There is nothing to be gained from beating her down and forcing her to admit the solution she describes might lead to more problems than solutions.

 

You're not beating anyone down or forcing anyone to agree with your view. All you're doing is fretting because you don't like the fact that there are women out there who don't need to rely on a man's paycheck, or lack of one.

 

She isn't all that interested in getting involved with someone again anyway. But she also indicated above that things are not quite so black and white as she tends to describe them. I hope for the best for her regardless.

 

......

 

I agree with her that equity is important in a relationship. I don't measure things only in terms of money.

 

From your statements on this thread, you DO measure a relationship by money.

 

Sorry but bills need to be paid and in reality, people work for a living.

[soserious1]

You can send them my way if you want, but I don't associate with gold diggers.

 

And i don't associate with men who assume they're going to be allowed to move in & live here totally rent free simply because I own the place.

[Mme. Chaucer]

You know what, soserious1? I have a LOT of compassion for you. I do NOT disagree with how you choose to live your life and how you handle your relationships with men. But I am sad that you are so entrenched, invested in and defined by the bitterness and anger that your divorce (and the marriage) left you with.

 

I do understand how and why you'd feel the way you do.

 

I also KNOW that you could / can move through and past the emotional component of it and find out how to be a happy, serene person. If you wished.

 

You still wouldn't have to share your stuff with any guys.

[jwi71]

Here is one that shows you don't know a thing about how marital property works

 

 

 

No, she can't. Because it isn't her "own" money. Money made during marriage, with the exception of inheritance, depending on the state, is MARITAL. Half of any money she will make is his too, and vice versa.

 

But lets not forget in the same post, you contradicted yourself and went against your own words.

 

Here endeth the lesson. Kerplunk.

 

Well, again not quite accurate.

In community property states there are three sources of funds which are universally considered separate:

 

1) Inheritance

2) money gifted to one spouse

3) money awarded in a personal injury case (but not money to compensate for lost wages)

 

4) any asset purchased with funds from one of the above will also be considered separate property.

 

These are universal. I cannot find a state where the above is not the case. As always, seek legal counsel in your jurisdiction when one has questions regarding the law.

[Black Jack]

Really, I'm defending myself. I don't agree that your way is the only way, and I strongly believe that one goal of feminism was to provide opportunities for EVERYONE to make choices rather than to be bound by traditional gender roles. I have not embraced a traditional gender role in most aspects of marriage, but I could have chosen to. AS LONG AS MY PARTNER WAS CONSCIOUSLY MAKING THE COMPLEMENTARY CHOICE.

 

Thought you weren't a sexist?

 

Maybe I have not read every post you've made, but honestly I cannot recall EVER seeing you get reamed for not wanting to share your assets in a relationship. Or, ever seeing even a suggestion that you should "allow" a man to live with YOU rent free.

 

That's the problem right there. You just pick and choose what you want to hear to suit your agenda.

 

People are getting on your case because you are insulting everyone who does, in fact, "allow" their partner to live in the house "rent free." Or who believe (as I do) that earning money is NOT the main prize that a person brings to a union.

 

The only folks doing it are you and Johan. Nobody else here is harping on her. If you think everything is rent free and inheritance money is supposed to be shared then I'd advise you to stop paying your bills.

 

AND I WAS THE SOLE / MAIN (circumstance fluctuated over the years) EARNER IN MY FIRST MARRIAGE, AND AM NOW THE FAR BIGGER ASSET HOLDER IN THIS MARRIAGE.

 

Caps so you don't mistake me for someone who is a "freeloader."

 

But my husband is NOT a "freeloader" either.

 

Your insistence that he must be, or that I must be getting taken for a ride, is insulting.

 

........

[johan]

And i don't associate with men who assume they're going to be allowed to move in & live here totally rent free simply because I own the place.

 

I don't expect you to. I've said several times that I understand where you are coming from. You are free to choose. You just have to understand it's not what many people want.

[soserious1]

You know what, soserious1? I have a LOT of compassion for you. I do NOT disagree with how you choose to live your life and how you handle your relationships with men. But I am sad that you are so entrenched, invested in and defined by the bitterness and anger that your divorce (and the marriage) left you with.

 

I do understand how and why you'd feel the way you do.

 

I also KNOW that you could / can move through and past the emotional component of it and find out how to be a happy, serene person. If you wished.

 

You still wouldn't have to share your stuff with any guys.

 

In my daily life I'm actually pretty happy. I enjoy an active working & social life.My sexual needs are dealt with quite easily via pump & dump throw away relationships that are FAR better in meeting my needs than being married ever was.

[soserious1]

I don't expect you to. I've said several times that I understand where you are coming from. You are free to choose. You just have to understand it's not what many people want.

 

So then what you're saying is that I run the risk of ending up alone because not many men will want to be here unless they can live here rent free?

 

LOL, why wouldn't I rather be alone than to have to pay somebody to live with me?

[johan]

So then what you're saying is that I run the risk of ending up alone because not many men will want to be here unless they can live here rent free?

 

LOL, why wouldn't I rather be alone than to have to pay somebody to live with me?

 

No, I'm not saying that. There are plenty of guys willing to have relationships on the same terms you are.

 

There also lots of guys who don't want to have to get accounting degrees to date someone. I never wanted to count things to the penny with anyone I ever dated. Lots of marriages function just fine that way.