Women hire hookers to get better divorce settlements.

[sthomson]

I worry about the poor schmuck who finds out too late that he has married a frigid, gold-digging shrew; when out of nowhere comes this lovely beacon of light and hope, promising a brief yet tawdry surcease from his oppressive existence, only to find out that he has once again exchanged a moment's comfort for a lifetime of economic slavery.

To play devil's advocate, I worry about the poor sensitive soul who finds out too late that she has married an abusive, controlling ******* who continually refuses to divorce her and threatens to leave her penniless; when out of nowhere comes this lovely beacon of light and hope, promising to bring a just end to the hopeless cycle of abuse, only to find out that her actions will be mocked and mischaracterized by pretty much every unsympathetic troll in the whole world.

 

[CriticalSock]

That's to prevent cannibalism. They want to make sure you're well-fed until the body's too far gone to be edible.

Is that why it's usually cold meats that are served at the wake? The closest substitute...

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Anyone else feel a "ripped from the headlines" episode of Law & Order: Special Victims Unit coming on?

 

[Mark6]

To play devil's advocate, I worry about the poor sensitive soul who finds out too late that she has married an abusive, controlling ******* who continually refuses to divorce her and threatens to leave her penniless; when out of nowhere comes this lovely beacon of light and hope, promising to bring a just end to the hopeless cycle of abuse, only to find out that her actions will be mocked and mischaracterized by pretty much every unsympathetic troll in the whole world.

Not that I do not sympathize with the wife ou are describing, but who or what exactly is the "lovely beacon of light and hope" here? And what promises did that beacon break?

 

[Fnord]

I worry about the poor schmuck who finds out too late that he has married a frigid, gold-digging shrew; when out of nowhere comes this lovely beacon of light and hope, promising a brief yet tawdry surcease from his oppressive existence, only to find out that he has once again exchanged a moment's comfort for a lifetime of economic slavery.

To play devil's advocate, I worry about the poor sensitive soul who finds out too late that she has married an abusive, controlling ******* who continually refuses to divorce her and threatens to leave her penniless; when out of nowhere comes this lovely beacon of light and hope, promising to bring a just end to the hopeless cycle of abuse, only to find out that her actions will be mocked and mischaracterized by pretty much every unsympathetic troll in the whole world.

Which is why I also said:

The rest of the abusive, neglectful putzes that think cheating on their wives is their right and priviledge deserve whatever penalty the divorce judges hand down.

I imagine that for every thousand abusive b*st*rds that treat their dogs better than they treat their wives, there is at least one poor slob who once believed in the myth of "Happily Ever After", married a psychodemonbitchqueen, put up with her contempt, abuse, cheating and alcoholism, and lept at the chance to connect with what he thought was a kind, caring soul.

It is not always the men who are villains, and it is not always the women that are victims.

 

[Edges]

Thanks 'Darat'!

That is about what I was thinking as well. Also, the TV show you have in mind is called Cheaters and it is good for a quick laugh.

Nitpick- Cheaters isn't about hiring a hooker to trick your spouse/partner into cheating. It's a show where people who suspect that their partner is cheating can hire the show crew to investigate whether their spouse/partner is cheating, then expose them on television if they are. It's more like hiring a private investigator with a Jerry Springer-like confrontation tacked on the end.

 

[WildCat]

I thought this already happened in the UK and the USA? Wasn't there a TV show in the USA that was about people who did this?

Thanks 'Darat'!

That is about what I was thinking as well. Also, the TV show you have in mind is called Cheaters and it is good for a quick laugh.

Actually, I think you're both thinking about Sex Decoy: Love Stings.

 

[Fnord]

According to This Wikipedia Article:

The badger game is an extortion scheme, often perpetrated on married men, in which the victim or "mark" is tricked into a compromising position to make him vulnerable to blackmail ... There are several variations of the con; in the most typical form an attractive woman approaches a man, preferably a lonely, married man of some financial means from out of town, and entices him to a private place with the intent of maneuvering him into a compromising position, usually involving some sort of sexual act. Afterward an accomplice presents the victim with photographs, video, or similar evidence, and threatens to expose him unless blackmail money is paid...

The Badger Divorce game only adds a few details to allay the suspicions of the mark, and then uses the 'evidence' so gathered to assure the wealth of the wmoan seeking a more lucrative settlement in a divorce.

Instead, why not avoid marrying a "Bad Boy" in the first place, and thus also avoid all this heartache and manipulation? Some men are simply no good, and women are well advised to avoid them. Just ask Sandra Bullock.

 

[CriticalSock]

Do you have her number Fnord?



(I think my dad might be interested)...

 

[Fnord]

Do you have her number Fnord? (I think my dad might be interested)...

Heh! I wish!

That sentence about her was rhetorical, btw.

 

[Ron_Tomkins]

Well, quite a piece of work us humans turned out to be, now didn't we? I honestly wonder what Beings from another planet would think about us.

This has pathetic written all over it.



So um... what exactly happens next? I mean, after the guy has gone out on a couple dates with this undercover teaser and has finally divorced his wife. What then? Does she say "Smile! You're con candid camera!" I mean... clearly she doesn't stay with him forever.

 

[dudalb]

I am still amazed that people are "shocked" by this. Only thing new about this is that the wives are doing the hiring . The Badger game has been standard plot device in Crime Fiction for years.

 

[Delscottio]

What I am shocked at is that the reason for the split up makes a difference to the allocation of the "shared" resources. Surely it's down to circumstances of the parties involved?

 

[Trigood]

I can honestly say I've never thought about it that way before. Thank you for that fresh perspective.

I'm sure Hellbound was happy to meat your needs.

 

[sthomson]

Not that I do not sympathize with the wife ou are describing, but who or what exactly is the "lovely beacon of light and hope" here? And what promises did that beacon break?

The hooker, still. I don't think I mentioned any promises - the ultimate undoing of such a wife would be cold, cruel society who cannot understand her actions, or something.

I imagine that for every thousand abusive b*st*rds that treat their dogs better than they treat their wives, there is at least one poor slob who once believed in the myth of "Happily Ever After", married a psychodemonbitchqueen, put up with her contempt, abuse, cheating and alcoholism, and lept at the chance to connect with what he thought was a kind, caring soul.

It is not always the men who are villains, and it is not always the women that are victims.

Well no **** - in fact, I would go so far to say that in 99% of divorces, there are NO villains OR victims.

I just find it sort of interesting that you chose to go with the poor story of the "one in a thousand" (I would say 1 in a million), rather than a more common tale: Man or woman is married to a perfectly normal spouse that they just don't like anymore. Perfectly normal spouse does not want to get divorced because it is apparently an excruciating process in Japan.

 

[Fnord]

What I am shocked at is that the reason for the split up makes a difference to the allocation of the "shared" resources. Surely it's down to circumstances of the parties involved?

All of the above. Divorce courts have some sort of 'formula' for determining who gets what and how much. Many states have enacted "No-Fault" divorce laws to reduce the influence on the court's decision-making process the either parent's lack of morality may have, but this does not always work fairly.

If there are kids, then they almost always go to the mother; and because she has the kids, she almost always gets the house, as well. Since she's going to need some means to get those kids to and from school, music lessons, sporting events, and therapy sessions, she will also need the family car.

Of course, since she has become the custodial parent of a houseful of kids, and can't be expected to hold down a job, she is entitled to at least half of her former husband's earnings, whether or not her new boyfriend moves in with her.

In Japan, of course, things are different. I don't know if there is any such thing as "Irreconcilable Differences" in Japanese divorce court, but the person filing for divorce seems to be considered the disloyal partner when there is no proof to the contrary. It seems that unless the woman filing for divorce can prove abuse, neglect, infidelity or criminal activity, she seems likely to be given the short end of the deal. The easiest of these to 'prove' is infidelity. Just snap a few photos of the cheater in the arms of a prostitute, and that's money in the bank for life.

 

[CynicalSkeptic]

Of course, since she has become the custodial parent of a houseful of kids, and can't be expected to hold down a job, she is entitled to at least half of her former husband's earnings, whether or not her new boyfriend moves in with her.

Fortunately (in my experience) that part is not true. I pay a significant amount in child support, but nothing in alimony/spousal maintenance. She also gave me the house and her car, but only because she knew she couldn't make the payments. And with my income drastically reduced by child support (and legal fees) neither could I.

 

[Fnord]

Anyone else feel a "ripped from the headlines" episode of Law & Order: Special Victims Unit coming on?

It's more likely to turn up as an episode of Aibou, if it hasn't already.

 

[Dragonrock]

I just find it sort of interesting that you chose to go with the poor story of the "one in a thousand" (I would say 1 in a million), rather than a more common tale: Man or woman is married to a perfectly normal spouse that they just don't like anymore. Perfectly normal spouse does not want to get divorced because it is apparently an excruciating process in Japan.

Maybe he did it because the thread is about wives entrapping their husbands.

To me it just looks like you're itching for a fight.

 

[sthomson]

Maybe he did it because the thread is about wives entrapping their husbands.

To me it just looks like you're itching for a fight.

Is entrapping the right word? In police work, a charge of "entrapment" is pretty specific, and the victim has to show that s/he would have been unlikely to commit the crime without police enticement. As such, when considering whether hiring a prostitute to initiate/spur on divorce proceedings is "entrapment", we also must consider the character and motivations of the husband.

I can see how you'd think I'm "itching for a fight", considering divorce is a very sensitive subject for many people. I am cursed with the tendency to see both sides of a story. I don't believe in Evil, only in Human Nature. If one person is capable of, say, cruelly entrapping her husband in a greedy attempt to live the high-life post-divorce, then we are all capable of such callous measures and should consider our own actions (and our rationalization for such actions) in this new light.