Sportscaster Outlines Wife's Lavish Spending Habits in Messy Divorce Trial

Marriage is slavery for wage earners and welfare for non/low wage earners. That's it. Mr. Nance will lose much of what he's earned because the whole point of marriage (incl post-marital laws) is to transfer $ to the person who doesn't make $. The fact that she was a spend thrift will HARM Mr. Nance's chances in court because he must keep up his slaveholder's living status. In addition, the more worthless she is (she likely has no skills at all and she can't even clean her own home) the worse off Mr. Nance is. When you sign up for marriage at the court house guys, you're actually agreeing to be your girlfriend's slave. I suggest you not make that leap. Abolish civil marriage. Abolish slavery.

Men all over America are starting to become hip to the perverse mathematics of marriage. The harder a married man works to earn money, the more successful he is, the more he will be forced to pay his ex-wife when they divorce. And divorce is the probabilistically most likely outcome of a marriage, so don't think that you will somehow escape unscathed.

Why should men work at all under these unfair laws and expectations? No wonder many men aren't even bothering to go to college. No wonder many have become "slackers." Whatever heterosexual men, who have the guts (insane inclination?) to get married, will earn will only be taken away from them by unfair laws, and by avaricious and spend-thrift ex-wives. If they earn big money, and stay single, it will only make them a target of gold-digging women... so why bother?

So the new ethic is earn next to nothing (or at least make it look that way), don't pay for anything on a date that is not equally shared by your woman, don't promise anything financial, don't promise to be the provider, don't get married, don't have children, and then your life will be a lot simpler, then you will not be a slave.

It just hit me - $1.5 million in child support. $1.5 with six zeroes. I haven't heard "child" support described this way but much of child support payments are actually spousal support. Let's say your ex-spouse is completely worthless and makes nothing or next-to-nothing. If you pay, say $60k in "child" support, $20k is your contribution to support your child, $20k is your contribution to your ex-spouse (aka alimony) so she can support her child, and $20k is just flat-out alimony. For Mr. Nantz the numbers are just bigger. End civil marriage. End slavery.

redwoodwriter, Do you have any estimate of the number of men who remain in their marriages because loss of their kids and/or income/savings would be too draconian? What would the divorce rate be if men could unload the ball-and-chain? I'm thinking at least 75%. I live in a "what's fair" state which means because I make almost all the money, my wife would get almost all of our savings + lifetime alimony in all liklihood because I have the great privledge and opportunity to work at a job I completely despise. Plus she gets the kids. How is this not slavery? Where's Abe Lincoln when you need him? I just hope before I die someone will free me from my marriage.

Having a 29 year old girlfriend on the side is not good for his marriage nor will it be good for his divorce.

You forgot to mention 'don't shack up with a woman either'. Common law wife/palimony. I think that in some states, if you pay the rent (or I assume mortgage), she effectively 'becomes' your wife. Of course if she pays all the rent, you are a free-loading scoundrel in everyone's eyes, you are not a 'real man', and would deserve nothing even when she gives you the boot. Given that situation, you might as well tell her up front, "Hello. I will be your gigolo." Even if she is younger than you.

-ax

If I was married to a greedy bit**, I'd have a girlfriend too. When men cheat they're scumgabs, when women cheat it's because her husband is 'not meeting her needs'. "Midlife crisis"... Hah!!

-ax

Kris, His marriage sucked anyway. Maybe you find welfare queens with a bad shopping habit attractive, but most men don't. That's where the girlfriend came in. In a free country Mr. Nantz should be able to have a relationship with whomever he likes without any consequences at all. He should be able to divorce his wife without a penny shed and live happily ever after. Abolish community property. Abolish alimony. Abolish civil marriage. Abolish slavery.

Hey Champ1 -

I don't have any credible numbers about the percentage of men who remain married, when they would otherwise get a divorce, but do this for financial reasons alone. I know there are often other factors that play into the decision, including religious and ethical judgments about divorce, not wanting to mess up the kids too much emotionally, and not wanting to risk going out on one's own. See the following link for an article about the decision to leave a bad marriage. But I agree with your personal assessment -- the numbers of men in this category in America today are large.

http://www.divorce360.com/divorce-articles/causes-of-divorce/information/why-do-you-stay-in-a-bad-marriage.aspx?artid=855

Anthony, Are you serious? They were married for 26 years and Nantz is 50 now. That makes him 24, and likely a nobody, at the time of his marriage. As he became more successful he surely began to realize what his wife was like but let me tell you he was powerless to do anything about it. If he wanted to be with his daughter he had no choice but to put up with her. At 24 he did not know better. Nor did I. My situation mirrors his except I'm not nearly worth as much. No girlfriend either. Manslavery (aka civil marriage) law has to be at or near the top of the MRA agenda. Am I wrong?

Wow. You're the oblivious one Anthony. I tried to get my wife to work and she simply threatened to take my children away from me. There are countless men stuck in their marriages because of this threat and financial armegeddon. Marital law is surely skewed towards women and its ruining countless millions of men's lives. Accountability? Jesus Christ get a clue. There are young men who get proper counseling re: what marriage is and they either don't do it or get a pre-nup. The rest have no clue what marriage is. By the time you find out your slave status its too late. There are no good options. This isn't about accountability - it's about civil rights. "This guy should have controlled his finances and put a leash on his wife's ridiculous spending habits" A man, especially with children and a stay-at-home-mooch, has NO power to do this. None whatsoever. I can't believe you think he does. What would you suggest he do? Keep in mind his parenting rights are on the line here. I'm eagerly awaiting your answer. BTW Are you married?

I don't like the thought of people suffering in bad marriages and I do wish people could get out with little hardship. I also think that custody should be based on the best parent and best for the kids and not gender as I know several men that are better parents than their wives.

In marriage, once life changing decisions have been made, lifestyles chosen, sacrifices for the family, etc. I do not think it can be as simple as just packing up and leaving. I think in divorce cases things like 'fault' and 'intent' and 'agreements' need to be considered.

Currently the system favors the woman, the pendulum need to swing back a bit to be fair to men, but not so much that a man can leave his wife and kids on a whim.

I know nothing about this Nantz case, but I just know that a lot of details can be left out from the public. I have hung around sports people and high-rollers and sometimes you have one spouse that has messed around the whole time, spread incurable diseases to the faithful spouse, etc. But usually I see bad behavior by both, as greedy people seem to attract other greedy people and they each live with the other's bad habits because they get some type of shallow gratification from it. Then when the relationship fails, they point fingers at each other and try to portray the other as the bad one.

I wonder if his current young girlfriend likes to shop or if she is really in love with this much older man? If he is concerned about women spending his money he should be sure to look for women that love him for who he is, but some men like to 'buy' younger beautiful women.

Champ- I feel bad for you. I would recommend that you consult an attorney and figure out what the laws really are in your state. You need to know the facts not just assumptions. Sometimes different types of income, investments and assets are divided differently or may even be protected. For example savings accounts may have to be split, but not retirement accounts. If that is the case then put more money in a retirement account. You could even refinance a house and put the money in a retirement account. She may get 50% of the home, but it would have little equity.

Or If she is going to inherit a large chunk of money down the road (generally inheritance and gifts are not shared marital property) suggest she use it to pay down the home mortgage (because the home is an asset that will be split). You want to move equity around so it will be shared in your favor. See how a little planning can pay off?

They say that people that come out well in divorce do so because they planned for several years how to set themselves up financially based on the laws of their state and how things will be split.

I am not so sure it is good for the kids to witness dysfunctional relationships. As their own relationships will probably mirror their parents. Some people say it is best to stay together for the kids, some people say it is best to split. That's a personal choice only you can answer.

-Just a little friendly advise. Take it or leave it.

That strikes a few moments of fear in my heart.

Its difficult to even wrap my head around the current divorce laws and property laws of my state (Missouri), and to anticipate how they might change in the future. I've looked at prenup kits, and have been trying to tease out the things I would want ideally just in case, and anticipate what she would want from it. Originally I had figured I could survive a divorce if it happened early enough into the marriage, but if it happened later on, I would never be able to financially recover to get to where I needed to be to have the basic things I want to be able to retire comfortably. There is a part of me that hates to use a prenup that way to try to add a little insurance to the number of years that is possible, but that seems to be the best I can do with the equation. Even the best situation only buys a couple years.

Its much harder to recover in some ways on the verge of turning 40 then it is when I was 20. I've finally got a minor child to legal age and been able to not have that child support payment every month. I do not want another 20+ years of payments for something that I no longer get to participate in; I've been there, it wasn't fun! So I'm not naive, but I haven't been through the whole wonderful state splitting of joint assets thing before, nor do I wish to, but just in case -- what things should I be looking for AFA gotchas?

I've also considered (with some unique things to this woman) that I would be in the same ballpark of numbers with anyone else. Though maybe a little better off initially financially, most likely not in many other ways. Its still a high risk if I take it.

Sacred,

First, I'm assuming you work and your girlfriend either doesn't work, doesn't want to work, or makes less $. This type of arrangement accounts for most marriages.

Never forget that fundamentally civil marriage is a state welfare program. I'm not saying this for shock value. Marriage IS a welfare program designed primarily for women (100 years ago noone ever contemplated K-Fed). When you get married your making a pact between you, your girlfriend, and the state to take care of her. That's it. Love has nothing to do with marriage. Staying faithful to your spouse has nothing to do with marriage. Your religious beliefs and your wedding vows have nothing to do with marriage. Obviously your girlfriend and the state benefit from this arrangement. There is no benefit to you whatsoever. In accordance with Victorian ideals, as a man you are simply expected to want to do this. In reality most men simply have NO clue what they're signing up for. There is "risk" for you in marriage but know that it's all to the downside. You literally have NOTHING to gain by marrying. You can only lose.

Pre-nups BTW are not foolproof. They are getting challenged in court regularly now and it's possible yours would only be good for wiping your ass when you really need it. Again, remember that marriage is a welfare program. The state does not want to take care of your girlfriend. The state wants you to do it.

I'd keep writing but I'm tired and I need to go to bed. Now you know what marriage is. Honestly, if you decide to get married you're crazy.

I know that in at least some states, if you are supporting a live-in girlfriend, I believe even if only on paper (such as your name is the only one on the rent check), she can still nail you to some extent if she wants to.
-ax