This is basically alimony except you don't need to be married, just live together for 3+ years. We need open discussion about how men can protect their assets from women. There is an opt out clause if you both co-sign a document that waive those rights, will any women sign this? Will it hold up in court? What if they claim it was signed under threat/duress?
This already exists in most places in the world shitlord! Get with the times....SHITLORD!
Tyler Bell
Q predicted this
Gabriel Perry
quality posts right there, and original
Jack Stewart
Just remember the toothbrush rule. The day she puts a toothbrush in the bathroom marks Day 1 of her cohabitation. The reason the government puts a law like this into effect is to prevent the women from going on welfare to support herself after the breakup. I wouldn't trust the opt-out clause as it would be up to the judges discretion and most likely wouldn't do shit.
Kek roasties are gonna become even less desirable This law will have an unintended opposite effect
David Green
what does the sign tell me? instead of being straight I should turn right? like being a gay fascist or what?
Cooper Ortiz
I assume this is some kind of bot, or a really bad raid?
Yeah it's going to be up for interpretation, there are other laws in the UK that guide things like collection of benefits and they rely on cohabitation rules, and they actually define quite specifically what that means, which is something like 3 nights a week or more spent the night.
We've seen cases where prenups have been thrown out of court because the woman has claimed she signed the prenup only because she had a verbal agreement with the man, none of which she could prove, but a judge threw it out anyway and awarded her half his shit. So I don't trust opt out clauses either.
It's funny because the white papers leading up to the decision to push this through parliament actually discuss things like it might create "cut off dates" where someone kicks out their partner prior to the date to avoid the liability and about how judges should be flexible to that, so god knows you could probably cohabit for 2.5 years and then if you split she could claim it was because you wanted to avoid your legal responsibility and a judge might lap that up.
Bottom line is, men were pushed to cohabit when marriage laws were fucked with, and now cohabitation laws are being fucked with. Where will this end?
Levi Bennett
Q predicted this
Lucas Sullivan
Where does Q do predictions? Which site?
Ian Parker
We should have never given them the right to vote. They always vote for more and more gibs.
Matthew Lopez
>We need open discussion about how men can protect their assets from women. Don't live together for 3+ years.
>Will it hold up in court? no.
Adrian Ortiz
It's generally accepted as the logo for MGTOW (Men Going Their Own Way)
The vertical arrow represents society and the status quo, the expectation on men by society to marry and father children and things of that nature. And the arrow tilting to the right represents men going their own way apart from society, because fundamentally society treats men like shit.
This law is a good example of that. We all know what this means, men who earn most of the money will invest in property, they'll let a woman cohabit with them in exchange for sex but avoid marriage in order to avoid the financial liability and losing their home/assets/business. This law will just facilitate more wealth transfer from men to women.
Jaxson Baker
Hide your wealth in crypto or Swiss banks or whatever. Don't have any assets or account balances they can confiscate.
Kayden Gonzalez
Something like this is already active here in the Netherlands. Simply never live together with a woman to protect your assets.
>The vertical arrow represents society and the status quo, the expectation on men by society to marry and father children and things of that nature.
so MGTOW are fighting against toxic masculinity?
Justin Evans
I stick to banging cheap Hookers from now on, It's going to be less expensive in the long run
William Edwards
We're not fighting anything, rather disengaging with parts of society which aren't a net benefit to us. Apparently avoiding marriage is now no longer enough, we'll also have to avoid cohabitation, which is fine with me quite frankly.
Dominic Russell
...This is just absurd. They are just making thhlings worse.
Thank you for reminding me to never have a female live with me
Brandon Morris
you are not supposed to protect your assets from your woman. You are supposed to invest this assets in her and your child so your child will have a good future. Then both of you die. There is no point in protecting your assets. Only raising a family is what matters especially when you're a white brit.
And white men who attempt to go into relationships without intention to make them longterm and havinhg babies should be killed anyway and their assets distributed among british families because white men who refuse to have relationships or at least children in Europe of 2018 are worthless anyway
