"You feel like you've been asked to sign your life away."
Really? So, all the money that this man has made for a life of work, that's you signing your life away? How is this man's property considered yours, before you even get married to him?
"Does he value me? Love me? Trust me?"
Let me quote one of my favorite presidents, "Trust but verify." And what does any of that have to do with this anyway? He already shouldn't trust you, because you've just stated that you believe that all of his possessions already belong to you if you get married, when you said you were signing your life away, and you're not even married to him yet. Why should anybody trust you after you told him in no uncertain terms that you can't be trusted? You're a hot chick, with an obvious agenda. Anybody who trusts you, deserves the ass-raping divorce settlement that they will inevitably be saddled with.
"Help, he wants me to sign a prenup."
Even that title screams gold-digger.
"Help me, he wants to protect himself from the inevitable ass-rape divorce I'm going to hand to him, with the benefit of a feminist-run court system. What can I do? A prenup is his only defense against the gold-digging bitch that I am, and he wants to take the power vested in me by the court system away with it."
You need a survival guide, because he wants you to sign a prenup, like that's something you need to survive. Not a hurricane blowing down your house, or your spouse being killed, or being chased by a pack of wolves. No, getting the inevitable divorce, and finding out that the little princess has to sully her hands with a real job, just the thought of that is a horrible tragedy that you must survive. My brother Marines are getting killed in horrible conditions in the middle east, and you have to sign a prenup. Poor freakin you.
She mentions twice in ten seconds that she's a doctor, and her degree is in clinical psychology. But I could find no mention of a practicing Dr. Lona Smith anywhere, and no license for a Dr. Lona Smith in the state of Florida, where she claims she lives. There is no record of her writing a dissertation anywhere. So, maybe she is a non-practicing, non-licensed psychologist. On the other hand, maybe she's full of shit. Maybe she's a gold-digging poser who's hot, and a pathological liar.
He's the love of your life, and you almost killed him because he wanted you to sign a prenup? Lady, you don't even know what love is, if it's that big a deal to you. And if you WERE a practicing psychologist, being that good looking, you would have all kinds of media offers to do talk shows, and would be doing quite well financially, so you would be asking him to sign a prenup.
Two cancelled wedding dates, five fired attorneys, multiple "it's overs", I'm leaving threats, knock-down drag-out fights? What kind of idiot is this guy, who put up with this crap? And why would a clinical psychologist have such a problem handling this situation? If you're dumb enough to believe that this idiot is a clinical psychologist. And that shit doesn't get any easier after you're married. That bitch should have been on the launching pad after her first temper tantrum.
"Help you protect yourself."
By protecting yourself, she means making sure she gets a big enough cut of his crap after the inevitable divorce. And notice, this video is targeting one specific type of woman: the gold-digging bitch. Being protected in life, by taking all of his shit? Maybe you can protect yourself by getting an education or profession and earning your own damn money, which you claim you've already done, DOCTOR.
"Lead you down the aisle"
"Rainbows and butterflies."
Well after five fired attorneys and knock-down drag-out fights during the engagement, nobody should be thinking being married to DOCTOR Lona Smith is going to be rainbows and butterflies. More like claymores and air-strikes.
"This is our time."
Yes, it is your time. And you're dicking it up, like the colossal psycho gold-digger that you are. The good news is, your children will probably be tough as nail after living in the post marriage war zone of your house. They'll probably be able to survive a zombie apocalypse, or uprising of the sentient machines. Maybe even an uprising of zombie sentient machines, They will be tough, vicious little bastards. Trust me, I know.
Fight fair? Really? Again, you are going into a marriage fighting? How is it going to turn out I wonder?
I guess the entire video, and the tone of entitlement is breathtaking. She, and those like her automatically assume two things: 1) That there's probably going to be a divorce AND 2) His stuff is hers, and when he wants a prenup stating otherwise, then she throws a temper tantrum.
I was once living with this woman, and I told her that she should have to pay half of the utilities since we were living together. This woman cried for three days, that I would dare ask her to pay anything to live in my house. Mind you, I wasn't asking her to pay part of the mortgage as rent, but by all rights I should have asked her for that too. Finally she acquiesced and paid half of the utilities.
Her repeated protests were along the lines of, "When Prince Charming took his princess back to the castle, he didn't ask her to pay rent."
OK, do I look like Prince Freaking Charming. And not to bring this up, but that's a fairy tale. This is reality. If you are going to live under this roof, and you have a job and the means, and you claim you want equal rights, well then guess what? You get to pay an equal portion of the rent and utilities. You are not entitled to my stuff. We're equal, remember? That means you can get your own stuff, and if the marriage dissolves, you have the equal opportunity to get your own damn place, and not soak me for a lot of cash. The fact that we even need prenuptial agreements is bullshit. Take your crap, and everything that you bought during the marriage, which is probably not much besides a buttload of shoes and purses that cost a thousand bucks a piece, and get out.
here's a story about billionaire Ken Griffin and his prenup:
His entitlement princess to be, is challenging the pre-nup, because she claims she had to sign it under duress:
Reports say Mrs. Griffin filed documents in court in Illinois this week challenging the prenup, saying it was signed under duress. Mr. Griffin, who filed for divorce in July,reportedly didn’t disclose his financial information until days before the ceremony,and she signed the prenup three hours before a rehearsal dinner on the night before their July 19, 2003, wedding.
At stake is Mr. Griffin’s reported $5 billion fortune. If the prenup remains in place, Mrs. Griffin would get roughly 1% of that, or $50 million. If it doesn't she could get substantially more.So, fifty million dollars isn't enough for the little princess, She wants the whole enchilada for the duress he caused her for the last eleven years, where she lived in the lap of luxury. Poor little entitlement princess. She had to fly in gulf streams all over the world, and live in a collection of mansions, and now fifty million dollars just isn't going to cover it. What a greedy little bitch!
According to Business Outsider, prenups don't hold much weight in the British Judiciary:
Except when the roles are reversed, and the man wants to nullify the prenup:
London's Supreme Court just ruled against a former JP Morgan i-banker who wanted the court to reverse a decision that slashed his $7.8 million divorce settlement to $1.6 million, Bloomberg reports.
Judges found in favor of his ex-wife, a wealthy German heiress and one of the richest women in Europe, based on the prenup the couple signed in 1998.So I guess, when you're a woman in Europe, the prenup holds up. When you're a man, then it doesn't even count.
In what seems to be a common occurrence, in high profile U.S. prenup cases, the woman claims she had to sign the prenup under duress, and sues the husband for more money. This happened to Deion Sanders and he was lucky enough to win. But what this really is, is a bunch of gold-digging whores refusing to take responsibility for their own lives. In most cases, they get more than enough in a divorce settlements to live comfortably for the rest of their lives, but even that's not enough.
I used to tell dudes, that if they're insistent on getting married, which they shouldn't be, then get a prenup and don't procreate with the woman. Yes, yes, I know I'm a hypocrite because I did get married. That was before I was introduced to the men's rights movement, and started paying attention to all this stuff.
Now it seems that you can't even get a prenup, they'll still come after you. And for the love of God, do not procreate with these women. That, I didn't do, and it saved me a lot of heartache.
Here's a story, if you can believe it, about a fourteen year old dude who was raped by a twenty year old woman, and now has to pay her child support here in Phoenix:
Statutory rape victim forced to pay child support
PHOENIX — Nick Olivas became a father at 14, a fact he wouldn't learn for eight years.
While in high school, Olivas had sex with a 20-year-old woman. As he sees it now, she took advantage of a lonely kid going through a rough patch at home.
State law says a child younger than 15 cannot consent with an adult under any circumstance, making Olivas a rape victim. Olivas didn't press charges and says he didn't realize at the time that it was even something to consider.
The two went their separate ways. Olivas, now 24 and living in Phoenix, graduated from high school, went to college and became a medical assistant.
Then two years ago, the state served him with papers demanding child support. That's how he found out he had a then-6-year-old daughter.
Even more retarded, are comments like these from the Daily Mail version of the story:
Somebody named Imwilker from Gosport said:
No, it's not the child's fault, but the father should not have to support her you dribbling
idiot. The mother, who committed the statuatory rape, needs to bear ALL of the costs for her actions.
Now, you can search the Superior Court website here in Maricopa County, and Nick Olivas does have family court documents, but they have been conveniently removed by the court, in an attempt to cover their tracks on this, and why shouldn't they? They know this is and the word justice don't belong together, so they are taking a lesson from the IRS. Obviously the judge doesn't want to be in the news for this.
Here's the case number anyway: FC2014-052648
Another interesting tidbit of information here, Olivas has had his name all over the news, but the woman that commited the rape and had the child has had her name excluded/hidden, as has the Superior Court Judge that made the ruling. So, let me get this straight, if a woman is raped or the rapist, she gets to keep her identity a secret. If the man is the rapist, well he is outed immediately. That sounds like justice to me!