70% of divorces are initiated by women. Now a Pedestalman might say that’s because more than ever men are horrible, but a Pedestalman would say the same if 70% of divorces were initiated by men.
Kids, don’t do pussy pedestals.
The truth about the Divorce Industrial Complex is exactly as I have described it here on this blog: INCENTIVES MATTER. And American women respond to the personally advantageous incentives of the divorce market which massively redistributes money and children away from ex-husbands to ex-wives at no cost or stipulation to the women.
Proof? It’s as plain as the mangina in your midst who never took a risk with the opposite sex in his life. But if you prefer STATS AND DATA, here you go:
Rise of women backing out of divorces as court settlements shrink
Women are backing out of divorce cases because settlements are becoming less generous, experts have said.
Fewer wives are being awarded income for life and they are increasingly having their divorce settlement limited to a few years.
This is making some of them back off from going through with a split, law firms say.
Yo yo yo….ayo hol up….so what you’re sayin is….
WIVES DON’T FRIVORCE WHEN THE GRAVY TRAIN IS SHUT OFF
How about that! Women ARE rational creatures! This is an astounding discovery to the world of white knights who had been laboring under the belief that women bear no moral culpability for social ills, nor exercise any self-serving sex-based calculus which might fray the social fabric.
I’m happy to see that at least in some White redoubts the direction of reform is heading away from incentivizing EatPraySlut frivorce rape and toward equitable treatment rooted in a wise understanding of the inherent, innate, and intractable biosocial differences between men and women.
Trump’s tax reform eliminates the tax exemption for alimony payments.
Feminists are up in arms because they know women will be getting less generous settlements since Uncle Sam is now taking a slice of the pie.
LikeLiked by 2 people
“Trump’s tax reform eliminates the tax exemption for alimony payments.”
WHOA!!! Gotta URL? That one slipped under (((the radar))).
LikeLike
Alimony tax changes may scorch divorcing couples https://www.cnbc.com/2018/02/16/loss-of-alimony-tax-break-in-tax-law-may-inflame-divorce-negotiations.html
LikeLiked by 1 person
Under Trump’s tax law, you now have a year to avoid a nasty divorce https://www.marketwatch.com/story/under-trumps-tax-plan-divorces-are-about-to-get-a-lot-nastier-2017-11-03
LikeLike
I know a chick whose story is the dude has a thing for 18 year olds and he was cheating and a drinker. Best part is bc she earns like a mfer (political family) she has to pay HIM for 6 months. I need to get on this gravy train lol
women ARE rational if you say $2M or $1M which would u like?…they aren’t STUPID after all, just venal. As the Little Caesars ads used to show “they seem to prefer two.” By that logic, even children are rational.
If a woman tries to “back out,” you go forward. It’s only the price tag keeping her around. A FOOL would stay with a woman who filed on him. From that day forward, you hide money, you put on lojack or PI to find the liaisons, even if you have to encourage em, and then you blow her out of the water. Let her come home to a house with a For Sale sign, drained accounts, and all the furniture gone.
Welcome to equality bitch
LikeLike
great newsz for da betasz!
now dat you wife won’t be rewarded handsomely
for divociring you
she will stay married
while working her coportate jobz
and giving her boss and boss’s boyz
blowjobz
lzozozozolz
LikeLiked by 1 person
i’m with GBFM on this
not sure how it’s a win that more women will stay with their men just for the money.
if she wants a d1vorce in the first place, she’s basically done with you. there’s no respect or desire left.
a man would be better off ending it and finding a decent woman who truly respects and desires him than settling for a loveless m@rriage with a woman who is only with him for the money.
LikeLike
C, it will be VASTLY better for the kids, however. The moar time the kids have in the same house as their Bio-Daddy, the better the results will be for the kids.
[Compare the tragedy of poor Lucas Glover, who was raised by a single mom, and then a stepfather, and who ended up with an alcoholic shrike of a w!fe who takes a pair of scissors to his ball-sack whenever he doesn’t shoot a quality round of golf on the PGA tour. And that dude was Alpha enough to win a US Open.]
LikeLike
NM, for the record, CH’s link appears to involve UK common law, rather than US statutory law.
But it will be very, very interesting to see what happens to d!vorce statistics when the Trump alimony provision takes effect in 2019.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The UK High Court decision dated from 2014, so I guess it takes a few years for all of this to start percolating out into The System.
LikeLike
righteous!
LikeLike
What tax exemption? I had to pay out the nose for every cent my ex wife sent me
LikeLike
Under previous tax law, the person receiving the alimony, typically the ex-wife, was supposed to declare it on their return and pay the tax … as you properly did.
However, the IRS found that many ex-wives receiving alimony WERE NOT reporting the income. Thus, the change in the law, much to the chagrin of women’s groups.
LikeLike
When you think about the implications of this, however, it’s truly gut-wrenching.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Can you imagine the vicious bl00dy psychological jujitsu warfare which must going through the typical ho’s brain when she’s contemplating all of this?
Her Hamster is screaming bloody murder to be released from bondage so that it can go prancing out on the town every night in search of Alpha Phux at the Chardonnay Wine Bar, all while the forebrain* is ruthlessly calculating the financial implications of abandoning Beta Bux?
If there’s any luck, maybe the Zyklon chicks will have come from sufficiently good genetic material that there’s a chance we’ll see more classically stable loving spiritual marriages in the near future, as opposed to the pure unmitigated societal disaster which was Boomer & Xer & Millennial marriage.
LikeLiked by 1 person
*Female Forebrain == Whorebrain?
LikeLiked by 2 people
Woman’s Forebrain == Whorebrain.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Let’s let those of us who’ve gone through a contested divorce speak on this.
what’s going through her head? RAGE, dude. Anger, hatred, envy, bitterness.
There is no calculation. There is no logic. These d!vorce$ are $$$$$ clusterfucks precisely because women CANNOT make it just business; it has to be personal. They blow it all trying to get back at you for…whatever.
What CH describes is child rationality not true logical thinking. A rational person says 2 cookies are too much high fructose corn syrup. A child says gimme 2 instead of 1. Give any monkey a crack lever and he’s pulling it every time. That’s all this is. Money is chick crack, we all know that (or should) by now.
If I told you the utterly insane shit my wife said during the divorce you wouldn’t even believe me. Nobody does, they assume I must be exaggerating, but I have it all in writing from authorities. Black ink on paper transcribed by state professionals.
LikeLike
contemplating?
during the exit, her head is filled with pure rage.
No reason here, it’s a crack lever, a monkey will pull it. Money is chick crack. Childlike rationality.
People don’t even believe half the shit my ex said and did during my bitterly, tooth-and-nail, contested attempted StateRape. The State never lifted a finger to help me, but the cops when called were typically sympathetic. And CPS finally after I raised these sprogs alone for 9 years, backed me up one time in court.
LikeLike
Which are the gut wrenching implications?
LikeLike
That women generally aren’t good for anything but casual sex and have careers because they aren’t held accountable in the workplace and thus see work as a social and vanity endeavor.
LikeLike
What’s the definition of a bachelor?
It’s a guy who’s never made the same mistake ONCE.
– Cpl. Hicks
LikeLiked by 1 person
Marriage is a great institution.
I just don’t want to be institutionalized.
LikeLike
[…] The Divorce Industrial Complex Responds To Incentives […]
LikeLike
70% is the exact same figure as in France after divorce was legalized in the French Revolution. Methinks hypergamy plays a huge role here. Lots of women think their pussies are dipped in gold. Cause and effect, intelligence, logic, extrapolation of trends are not their strong suits. They excel at making goo goo noises with children and household skills if properly controlled. Look how many of these stupid slots demand more and more for less and less in return as they age. The only hope for the white race will be a strong pimp hand in the future, changes to the laws that favor men and family formation once again and a strong pimp hand.
LikeLike
There’s an exceptionally difficult problem in statistics here, which involves whether or not you can extrapolate from the set of all m@rriages which end in d!vorce back to the set of all m@rriages which do NOT end in d!vorce.
And then there are further difficulties as to whether “filing for d!vorce” versus NOT “filing for d!vorce” is a good indicator of each respective spouse’s appraisal of the m@rriage.
But if you can kinda/sorta do the extrapolation, then 30% of men’s libidos are are being stunted by their m@rriages, whereas 70% of all women’s Hamsters are su!cidally miserable in their m@rriages.
LikeLike
Those back-of-the-envelope first-order approximations do bear an eerie resemblance to the 80/20 rule, however: In pure unencumbered libertine R-Selected polygynous societies, 20% of all men get 80% of teh p00ntang.
LikeLike
It’s 30% of divorces that are initiated by men. Not 30% of married men …
LikeLike
Less so if your population is those m*rri*ges that end in divorce. That is a finite number and independent of manipulation. If you find that in 70% of those instances the woman filed for the divorce that is a solid figure.
LikeLike
These are tricky statistical problems, and it’s not always safe to study marriages which end in d!vorce and then attempt to draw conclusions about marriages which do NOT end in divorce.
[Nor vice versa.]
The problem for statisticians is that you have myriad public records for the marriages which end in divorce, versus essentially no public records whatsoever for the marriages which do NOT end in divorce.
So one set of statistics is a completely open book, whereas the other set of statistics is a dark, murky, potentially unknowable mess.
LikeLike
this should be the start of the solution to problems like this
https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2013/01/09/beta-of-the-month-when-you-cant-hide-it/
LikeLike
(((It))) will never stop. (((It))) is gloating about the biracial triumph. Carlos nailed this one.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/style/wp/2018/05/16/feature/the-making-of-meghan-markle-a-confident-mixed-race-woman-marries-into-the-royal-family/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.dd302bd25023
LikeLike
Shit it is obvious as the nose on Laura Loomer’s face.
LikeLike
So doing the math, if 50% of marriages end in divorce and 70% of divorces are imitated by women. Then I have a 35% chance of risking 50% of my current and future assets because she doesn’t like me anymore.
Sorry, Ill pass. Most women are not appreciating assets worth the investment risk.
LikeLike
Sancta Simplicitas!
or is it …. (((simplicitas))) 😉
The land of a rich man produced plentifully, and he thought to himself,
‘What shall I do, for I have nowhere to store my crops?’
And he said,
‘I will do this: I will tear down my barns and build larger ones, and there I will store all my grain and my goods. And I will say to my soul, “Soul, you have ample goods laid up for many years; relax, eat, drink, be merry.” ’
But God said to him, ‘Fool! This night your soul is required of you, and the things you have prepared, whose will they be?’
So is the one who lays up treasure for himself and is not rich toward God.
LikeLike
Alimony has traditionally been taxable, and is almost always temporary, even if it goes on for years. For all but the stupendously wealthy, the way around this is to be generous with child support, which is not taxable. This tax change affects couples without kids where one spouse earns far more income than the other, and the stupendously wealthy who can’t hide taxable income in child support. Also for others paying alimony, this just eliminates a distortion in how much is truly being awarded, i.e., an award of $60k/year is really $60k, not some unknown lower figure after taxes.
LikeLike
Backing out of divorces? Imagine being the pathetic twat waiting to take her back after she calls off a divorce because it’s not lucrative enough.
LikeLiked by 1 person
my thoughts exactly
no chance in hell i’d keep a woman who is only staying for the money
LikeLike
Yeah, as I was saying up above here, when you think about the implications of this, it’s truly gut-wrenching.
It makes you wonder how many m@rriages were ever the honest-to-goodness Chr!stian ideal of l0ving one another until D3ath Do Us Part, versus how many were simply the result of the Whorebrain winning the battle with the Hamster and settling for Beta Bux rather than Alpha Phux.
LikeLiked by 1 person
it’s like that famous saying, “domestic bliss comes through the barrel of a gun.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
Everything we see around us is because of (misguided) government policy. From all asian or all arab suburbs in your state. To the latest crisis, it’s because of government policy. The real reason why we have high divorce and a high number of single mothers is because of government policy and the laws that support it.
If we want to keep family’s together, and live in a 1950’s style utopia. Then a number of things would need to take place to end this failed feminist experiment. 1) end no fault divorce 2) end alimony and end the asset forfeiture to the spouse who didnt work. -This will stop in part the gold digging that we see with celebrity entertainers and celebrity business men. 3) Out of wedlock births get no social security, or financial support from the man and custody goes to the men and make it retrospective – This would stop poverty stricken women from having kids and those kids joining the prison industrial complex. It would also stop gold diggin’ hoes from getting knocked up. 4) Make the burden of proof and due process the same for civil cases as it is for criminal cases. 5) Stiffer (actual) penalties for false accusations in the press and unsubstantiated accusations. – Much of the #metoo movement is based on ‘he said she said’ accusations that are unsubstantiated and then printed in the press. If journalists and publications had jail time waiting for them. Many of the accusations we saw in the press would never have seen the light of day. It’s time for governments around the world to wake up and realize what keeps its machine running, and hint it ain’t the womynz.
LikeLike
Well look at what the G0d Emperor gave us in the 2017 tax package: No moar subsidization of Bluetropolis state & local income taxes, and no moar subsidization of Divorce Industrial Complex alimony payments.
That’s two massive financial pillars of The Poz which were gutted in one fell swoop.
It’s pretty amazing that the cuckservatives found the g0nads to vote for that sh!znat.
LikeLiked by 1 person
LikeLike
Also no moar subsidization of Sh!tlib Mega-McMansions in gated communities beyond the first $750,000 in mortgage value.
LikeLike
I was reading that as a result, some companies are moving.
One finance firm from NYC is moving to Nashville. The downside is that all those shitlibs from up there will transform wherever they move back into the places they left.
Next year will be telling as I figure many people are beginning their exodus or about done. We’ll see how those blue states that lost a chunk o’people fare.
Even before the tax breaks, in IL (thanks to Chicongo) the average person leaving IL was making 70k and the average person moving in IL was making 50k. For a bankrupt state like IL, that doesn’t bode well.
LikeLike
Evidence of women as rational actors – eh? Rationality = you gotta be able to see and weigh consequences. Weighing consequences is about self-agency ……. belief in one’s ability to make meaningful non-deterministic decisions for which one should therefore be personally responsible for the consequences thereof.
The constant shite I often hear in some parts of the sphere, about women’s reduced capacity for self-agency, vis-a-vis men, is bunk, and an idea that should be thrown in the dung heap with alot of similarly shallow so-called ‘redpill’ perspective.
Look – seeing women as being disadvantaged by way of inferior self-agency, normatively, is just another way to excuse women for their responsibility avoidance tactics. Which really isn’t quite ‘responsibility avoidance’ anyways, given that the intersexual game, as played now, allows for this easy out for women – i.e. – the easy out as upheld by the lie that women are more solipsistic, therefore less self-agentic, therefore not as responsible for the consequences of their actions and decisions.
No, the idea that women are less self-agentic is bunk ….. instead it is much more-so about the skewed incentives, and in the modern era, always has been.
(((Who be it))), in the modern era, that has been so degenerate with respect to promoting such wrong-headed ideas around incentives, meant to allow for unwarranted responsibility-avoidance among certain groups (pretty much all groups outside of white men …… but now the white men are losing their way too …. and falling for some of this shite too ……. but to be clear – the promotion of ‘responsibility avoidance’ is akin to tactics for breaking an animal, breaking it’s spirit, bending it’s will towards an agenda of domestication …… by way of the careful management of incentives and disincentives – operant-conditioning-style)?
(((Fuck these psychos))).
LikeLike
Know a guy that is 100% disabled veteran collecting a fat check every month tax free. He deserves every penny because he is seriously f-uped, but that’s not the point. He also makes good money as a stevedore.
His wife moved out and wanted a divorce. She hits the bar scene pretty hard and found a man to move in with.
She then found out that she can’t touch his disability payments. On top of that, he quits his job claiming it’s because of his disability.
She wants to call of the divorce proceedings move back in with her husband and “work things out.”
LikeLike
no means no
LikeLike