Well, at least now they are being honest about it..

I have actually read, on quite a few occasions, where women deny that claim. The even bandy around the NAWALT. Well guess what, here is the truth from their very own mouth, confessing what we have known to be the case all along..

In this day and age where women have access to more money than ever before and now understand what it brings, their claws are out to ensure there is plenty more where that came from. Being unable to control her own spending under the claim that they "Are worth it", endlessly end up in uncontrollable debt . The major pastime in the majority of marriages, is to control the little woman's spending. A task that is not only endless but always ends the same.way. That argument will never be the one you win as deep inside in their DNA, that spending molecule lurks. I am glad to say that not all are afflicted but the few would be too rare to mention..

It is ofcourse the reason why marriage breakups are so profitable and every company and lawyer thanks their lucky stars for the introduction of the no fault divorce, Manna from heaven or the real interpretation of that bit of legislation "How to Transfer Wealth from Men to Women", and it's working beautifully..
This ferocious type of woman charms her way into a rich man’s bed just to get pregnant and live a pampered, lavish lifestyle funded by him.
As divorce lawyer Diane Benussi revealed in The Sun yesterday, she has encountered women like this who have tricked men into having unprotected sex.
Whether the Piranha marries or drops their target, the result is the same — financial security.
Career girl Louisa Mason, 24, is proud to be part of the Piranha phenomenon.
She said: “My aim is to be married in the next two years to a very rich man. The easiest way to do this is to get pregnant — and then I know that he will marry me.
“Rich men are very easy to target. I have been doing this since I was about 17.
“I want the nice things in life — and when I have children I have no intention of working.

Just when you had thought you had heard it all. No longer is it sufficient to be declared as the "Goddess" of the Planet, ensured every possible legal and monetary entitlements, are within your greedy grasp at any time you wish. Not only have they been given carte blanche over laws and automatically employed over them men just because of their plumbing.

Nope, apparently not enough, not even remotely near enough for the Goddess to survive on the planet that she finds herself strangely imprisoned..
 Other courtesies must be applied in order that recognition of her lovelyness is bestowed, this purveyor, regurgitator and consumer of Protein and Pasta. People must pay abeyance, curtsy and fawn in her presence. No expense should be spared in ensuring that it's stay on this desolate planet should demand that she dirty her hands on meaningless labour, bother with the mundane daily activity of trivialities like preparing food, and more food and deserts or demand that she wash one's own clothes and, gasp.. expect one to dress oneself. It is barbaric to expect the Goddess to suffer in such meaningless, humiliating fashion..



Heads must roll and tax payers dollars must be found at incomprehensible amounts to appease this, this, this lazy, good for nothing layabout. But ofcourse, she will not be told the truth as that would be sexist and discriminatory, she is a woman donchaknow. It would be unfair to hinder this mincer of Gaia's soil (oohhh, dirt) to actually make it own way (what me walk!) just like everyone else. That would be unheard of. Because she is so special, more special than everyone else..


“Just when you think you have lost the ability to be shocked by the madness of this victim-centred, dependancy-obsessed, human-rights-fetish world, you read this," emails British reader TC:

The woman’s lawyers are bidding to convince the High Court the council is legally obliged to lay on a full care regime for her, including support staff to help her wash and dress herself and cook her meals.
Her legal team says the council must also provide staff to accompany her when out shopping, when she goes to the gym or “weight management” classes – and even when “she goes to a disco on Friday nights”.

All because she’s fat.

Feminists introduced the Vaginamony payments when they realised that men were working harder than women and making more money in the process. Cannot have that can we. So they introduced the incomprehensible "pay for life" alimony payments in order to ensure that as much wealth as possible was transferred to women which ofcourse suited them just fine as they could shack up with boyfriend (thug) and bang away to their hearts content knowing that income was going to continue regardless of her obnoxious or demanding behaviour (seeking increases in payments)..

So it become a common ploy that women welcomed with open arms and empty wallets. However, after the continual examples of women receiving multi-million dollar payouts via divorce courts and money they definitely did not deserve, it would appear that that holiday is about to come to an end and the lawyers are already concerned, not for their own incomes ofcourse, perish that thought..

Yes, it's really sad..

The free loading comes to an end. I knew that would happen as way too man rich guys were hit by the biased divorce court system and women walked away with more than half of the ex husband's money( see John Cleese). They got way too greedy. Who would have thought that..

States no longer wedded to idea of alimony for life
Bay State unties knot  

The traditional idea that post-divorce alimony payments should last “until death do us part” may itself be on its deathbed.
By a unanimous vote Thursday of its state Senate, Massachusetts joined a growing number of states that are junking the old model of virtually unlimited support payments to an ex-spouse.
While some divorce attorneys and marriage-law specialists fear the reforms may go too far, there has been a clear trend in states from Rhode Island and Pennsylvania to Texas and Utah to place new caps, time and age limits, and income criteria on alimony payments, reflecting in part social changes over the past few decades and the changing status of women in the workplace.
Just this year, Florida state lawmakers passed a law holding that the divorced spouse responsible for the alimony did not have to pay if the partner’s net income was significantly higher. Tennessee’s stateSupreme Court is also currently weighing a challenge to the idea of lifetime alimony.
The vote in Massachusetts means that the Bay State is catching up to other states regarding alimony laws, said Linda Lea M. Viken, president of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers.
“The whole purpose of alimony is to allow a former spouse to maintain their standard of living” from at the time of the marriage, said Ms. Viken, a former judge and lawmaker in South Dakota.
So for years, “alimony used to be, in many states, permanent, like it is in Massachusetts,” she said.

Link..