Monday, 19 May 2008

The Partnership Contract that should be Marriage?

It is proposed that single females/males contract with each other to perform services such as those listed below, as considered appropriate by the contracting couple.

(1) friend

(2) house-mate

(3) sex partner

(4) spouse

(5) civil partner

(6) business partner

(7) housekeeper

(8) butler

(9) companion

(10) nanny

(11) cook

(12) provider

(13) protector

(14) DIY expert

(15) co-parent

Its terms will be treated as terms of a contract. Breach of these terms will result in damages being payable. Damages incurred may be set off against the divorce settlement, unless waived.

An Impartial Friend to The Couple will be appointed by mutual consent.

Both parties are advised to consult this Impartial Friend should the need arise.

The Impartial Friend to the Couple becomes The Impartial Friend to the Family once there is offspring.

The role of this Impartial Friend of the Family is to

(a) support the integrity of family life

(b) adjudicate on marital disputes

(c) take into account the best interests of any child of the marriage in the context of living with both its parents unless it can be proven, beyond reasonable doubt, that more psychological and physical harm would come to the child through living with both its parents than if the couple parted

(d) provide a history of the marriage as a character witness should they be called upon to do so in the event of a divorce

The idea is that marriage will no longer be entered into unadvisedly or lightly; but reverently, discreetly, advisedly and soberly! If this makes partnerships to bring up children more likely to endure, then family life will be reinforced, lowering the crime rate and raising civic virtue.

It IS intended to take the distraction of romance out of the very serious business of bringing up children together - the TRUE purpose of marriage.

Childless unions are able to end without societal consequences, but those with offspring ought to be compelled to consider the best interests of their child and their impaired ability to parent once no longer living together as husband and wife.

Spouses who accuse the other of child abuse, child sexual abuse, domestic violence and similar crimes will be required to prove their allegations beyond reasonable doubt.

Marriage was never intended as a way of saying "I love you (until I no longer love you)." We ignore this fact at our peril.

Tuesday, 13 May 2008

Marriage Preparation Anyone?

The marriage preparation referred to here takes the form of a psychometric tests to be answered by the engaged couple and is designed to highlight potential relationship difficulties. FOCCUS (Facilitating Open Couple Communication Understanding and Study) is a research-based self-report or diagnostic inventory. It is designed for couples considering committing themselves to a long-term relationship such as the responsibilities of children and marriage.

The emphasis is very much upon developing a couple’s interest in a desire to face the realities of their particular relationship, rather than considering issues to do with relating as a generality.

Vote: Should marriage preparation be made compulsory by government to prevent avoidable marriage breakdown and single-parenthood?

Saturday, 10 May 2008

Beauty and depreciating assets

That Craigslist Ad (The One Posted By The Enterprising Young Woman)

Posted by Bess Levin, Oct 03, 2007, 5:25pm

Most of you have seen this (and forwarded to us) already but, for the record, this was the question:
What am I doing wrong?

Okay, I'm tired of beating around the bush. I'm a beautiful (spectacularly beautiful) 25 year old girl. I'm articulate and classy. I'm not from New York . I'm looking to get married to a guy who makes at least half a million a year. I know how that sounds, but keep in mind that a million a year is middle class in New York City, so I don't think I'm overreaching at all.

Are there any guys who make 500K or more on this board? Any wives? Could you send me some tips? I dated a business man who makes average around 200 - 250. But that's where I seem to hit a roadblock. 250,000 won't get me to central park west. I know a woman in my yoga class who was married to an investment banker and lives in Tribeca, and she's not as pretty as I am, nor is she a great genius. So what is she doing right? How do I get to her level?

Here are my questions specifically:

- Where do you single rich men hang out? Give me specifics- bars, restaurants, gyms

-What are you looking for in a mate? Be honest guys, you won't hurt myfeelings

-Is there an age range I should be targeting (I'm 25)?

- Why are some of the women living lavish lifestyles on the upper east side so plain? I've seen really 'plain jane' boring types who have nothing to offer married to incredibly wealthy guys. I've seen drop dead gorgeous girls in singles bars in the east village. What's the story there?

- Jobs I should look out for? Everyone knows - lawyer, investment banker, doctor. How much do those guys really make? And where do they hang out? Where do the hedge fund guys hang out?

- How you decide marriage vs. just a girlfriend? I am looking for MARRIAGE ONLY

Please hold your insults - I'm putting myself out there in an honest way. Most beautiful women are superficial; at least I'm being up front about it. I wouldn't be searching for these kind of guys if I wasn't able to match them - in looks, culture, sophistication, and keeping a nice home and hearth.

And this is the answer:

I read your posting with great interest and have thought meaningfully about your dilemma. I offer the following analysis of your predicament. Firstly, I'm not wasting your time, I qualify as a guy who fits your bill; that is I make more than $500K per year. That said here's how I see it.

Your offer, from the prospective of a guy like me, is plain and simple a cr@ppy business deal. Here's why. Cutting through all the B.S., what you suggest is a simple trade: you bring your looks to the party and I bring my money. Fine, simple. But here's the rub, your looks will fade and my money will likely continue into fact, it is very likely that my income increases but it is an absolute certainty that you won't be getting any more beautiful!

So, in economic terms you are a depreciating asset and I am an earning asset. Not only are you a depreciating asset, your depreciation accelerates! Let me explain, you're 25 now and will likely stay pretty hot for the next 5 years, but less so each year. Then the fade begins in earnest. By 35 stick a fork in you!

So in Wall Street terms, we would call you a trading position, not a buy and hold...hence the rub...marriage. It doesn't make good business sense to "buy you" (which is what you're asking) so I'd rather lease. In case you think I'm being cruel, I would say the following. If my money were to go away, so would you, so when your beauty fades I need an out. It's as simple as that. So a deal that makes sense is dating, not marriage.

Separately, I was taught early in my career about efficient markets. So, I wonder why a girl as "articulate, classy and spectacularly beautiful" as you has been unable to find your sugar daddy. I find it hard to believe that if you are as gorgeous as you say you are that the $500K hasn't found you, if not only for a tryout.

By the way, you could always find a way to make your own money and then we wouldn't need to have this difficult conversation.

With all that said, I must say you're going about it the right way. Classic "pump and dump."
I hope this is helpful, and if you want to enter into some sort of lease, let me know.

Who says money can't buy you love - or something like it?

by Quintus Slide, page 53, Money Week, 8 February 2008

  • "I'm not ashamed to admit I'm searching for a man wealthy enough to look after me. It's not that I'm afraid to work., it's just that I know I could have more out of life."
  • "I'm used to being treated nicely and living in luxury. I wear the most expensive clothes, like Valentino, Versace and Chloe, and Dom Perignon is my favourite champagne. I'd find it tough to settle for someone without money."

The quotes above come from two satisfied customers of, a dating site for wealthy men and the women who want to go out with them.

The second woman quoted is a 29 year old Russian model called Angelina Monteiro. According to the News of the World, she recently "auditioned" a prospective new sugar daddy to keep her in the high life. The audition went well and after four dates the new sugar daddy was "so smitten with her" that he set her up in a luxury flat in Mayfair and agreed to pay "lavishly" for her keep. She's coy about the exact amount, though she did confess that a previous married lover paid about £7,500 a month into her bank account.

The new one, who's 45, is good-looking, she says, "with nice manners and kind eyes" and very romantic. He drives a Ferrari and only wears designer clothes - that was one of the first things I noticed about him."

Finding a rich husband, as the News of the World says, is a new trend on the Internet. As well as, there's another site called and the sites don't make "any bones" about the service they offer. now has 250,000 members and its membership is growing by 4,000 a week. It's a simple deal, says psychologist Dr Sheila Keegan: "These girls are saying: 'You get my youth and looks and I get to share your money.' "

I've no idea who dreamt up the site, but it's perfect for our age. I'm sure it'll make a packet.

Forget Stocks, invest in a spouse

by Merryn Somerset Webb, page 30, Money Week, 18 January 2008

A great many Money Week readers are likely to be pretty liquid at the moment. But if you are holding a lot of cash, what's the best way to make it produce value for you? If you are single, the answer is a simple one: use it to help you find a partner. This is not as absurd as it sounds. Marriage provides a basic insurance against many of the nasty things in life: get it right and every burden is a burden shared. Indeed, if you add up all the emotional benefits of marriage, says US economists David Blanchflower and Andrew Oswald, you will find that they are worth the equivalent of US$100,000 a year in income to the average couple.

A study from the University of Zurich out a few years ago backed this up; it showed that the unmarried are pretty much always more miserable than their married friends. Only when they hit their 60s do happiness levels reach the same highs. And as an extra bonus, a variety of studies have shown that the married live longer on average than the unmarried. Then, of course, there are the actual financial benefits of being married: most couples have two incomes either all or some of the time, but living expenses of less than double those of one single person. Their income is higher, their expenditure per head is lower and, as a result, they get rich faster.

So how much cash do you have to lay out to find a spouse and start reaping the returns of marriage? That depends on how you go about it, says Mark Bridge in The Times. There are free dating websites about - ( and, for example), but they aren't particularly "slick" and provide more for those after "casual encounters" than those seeking marriage. The next cheapest option is to place a lonely hearts advertisement in the press (£2.60 a word in Private Eye -, although this can be labour intensive (you have to sift through all the replies), so a better option is probably to go for the paid-for websites. the two best known ( and have millions of members, charge in the region of £60 for six months and come reasonably well-recommended. The Times rate them nine and eight out of then respectively. Also highly rates is ("good for older people").

However, the well-off and time poor might be better all round with a proper matchmaking service. You can find a full list of offerings at, but The Times points to Caroline Crowther (, a well-established agency with a good record. Asking this lot to help you costs up to £2,500 a year, but given that the returns could be worth $100,000 a year plus, perhaps they offer a better place for your money right now than Britain's ropey stockmarkets.

Thursday, 8 May 2008

How to Find and Keep Love

Let's face it, human relationships are disposable, be you gay, lesbian or straight. Perhaps it was always ever thus because no one is in fact indispensable and unconditional love is the Holy Grail that tantalises us.

But look at it this way. If God existed, could even He have the unconditional love of his worshippers?

I rather think not. Were his worshippers to discover that He could not help grant them their wish even if He wanted to, then that would be the moment they ceased to worship him and "love" him.

Are there any atheists who, while disbelieving in God's existence, are nevertheless full of admiration for those who created the concept of an omnipotent, omniscient and eternal God, and developed Godly principles?

I suppose in this regard one could say that Abraham, Moses, Jesus and Muhammad had "developed" God and the ways He can be used to serve our mysterious purposes.

If even an omnipotent God cannot command unconditional love, why should we mere mortals expect it from other mere mortals?

If love is conditional, then what are those conditions?

Conditions are terms, are they not, and we now find ourselves talking in terms of contractual, business, partnership terms.

Since we are all so dishonest and confused about the Nature of Love, it is perhaps time that we reduce things to their essentials.

We most love those who give us most pleasure most consistently, and this must apply to people as well as inanimate objects.

Our capacity to love is entirely dependent on our ability to experience pleasure.

Our capacity to be loved is entirely dependent on our ability to generate pleasure.

To keep this partnership of mutually experiencing and generating pleasure in existence requires a great investment and expenditure of time, energy and money.

It helps enormously if there is something else bigger than the couple. In heterosexual couples this usually means children. In homosexual couples, this means some common interest or enterprise, and being indispensable to each other in more than one capacity.

Perhaps heterosexuals could learn from the gay and lesbian community, known for their promiscuity and unstable relationships, through this revealed truth?

Have I at last arrived upon the Secret of Love? Is it really all just about having common goals?

It does seem rather banal!

How Wives Should Treat Husbands by J Paul Getty

  1. Women should not be misled by the successful man's outward show of self-sufficiency. It's another - but all too true - axiom that a closer a man gets to the top, the lonelier he becomes. Business associates and aides cannot supply the deeply penetrating human warmth he requires. This can come only from a woman upon whom he focuses attention and love - provided she returns both with the added ingredient of understanding.
  2. Patience is indispensable when living with a successful man. There will be times when he forgets that he is at home and issues (or snaps) orders which he is accustomed to having obeyed without question at the office. He usually feels very badly about it afterwards, but may fail to make the called-for apologies or amends because he is preoccupied or because he can't easily drop the manner and mien that are musts for him ten or more hours a day.
  3. A woman should not think she has no constructive role merely because she does not attend board meetings. Love, affection, understanding and patience are all vital contributions. So are quiet, constructive, common-sense suggestions. Women have remarkable intuition and are often able to see - or foresee things that elude a man. The key is how the suggestions are made; there should be no hint of nagging.
  4. The "bored and jaded businessman's wife" is a cliche. In this day and age, any intelligent woman who is unable to find some activity to occupy her time rewardingly is merely making an excuse for her own laziness. The carping complaint, "I'm dying of boredom," is not likely to sit well with any man whose mind and energies being used to peak capacity.
  5. It's a purblind woman who frets and nags because her businessman husband isn't home for dinner on the dot or fails to spend as much time with her as she'd like. Most of those late-at-night business meetings are just that, and the businessmen attend them because they have no choice. They would far rather be home, relaxing, or having dinner with their wives. Of course, every man has his tolerance-limit. If constantly accused and berated, he cannot be blamed for deciding he might as well have the game as the name.
  6. Women should realise that any successful businessman is, by definition, a creative person and, like all creative types, is sometimes inclined to be temperamental. In this regard, I might say it has often puzzled me why some women will adoringly accept the outrageous tantrums of some would-be painter, but will create an unholy scene at the slightest show of temperament by a banker or building contractor.

How Husbands Should Treat Wives by J Paul Getty

Here are what are considered 7 key points every entrepreneur and man in business should keep in mind - and implement:

  1. Women, no matter how enlightened or liberated they think themselves, are still women. They respond to - indeed thrive on - warmth and affection, and there are very few who do not appreciate at least an occasional show of old-fashioned gallantry. Curtness, shouts and snarls may appeal to females who are mental masochists; in others, they engender on resentment.
  2. Women should never be allowed to feel she is only an ornament; merely another possession. It bears repeating that women need to be needed and to make positive contributions to a mutual effort. A man whose head is crammed with business facts, figures and problems may overlook all this, but if he does, he makes a mistake that may prove fatal to his marriage.
  3. Many businessmen frequently complain that there aren't enough hours in a day to take care of the work at hand. It's true enough. The active businessman seldom has all the time to do everything that should or could be done in his business. However, no matter how busy and successful he may be, he should make time to spend with his wife and family. This not only helps to insure the success of his marriage and enables him to understand and guide his children, it adds depth and dimension to his own nature and personality.
  4. Sex should be a mutually enjoyed and mutually gratifying experience. The physically and mentally tired businessman who comes home and then brusquely demands to "enjoy" sexual relations is a fool. Women require attention, affection, patience and imagination from their sexual partners - and are fully entitled to receive them.
  5. A man who heads a business enterprise is accustomed to having subordinates accept and accede to his varying moods. To expect the same docile reactions in his private life is to court disaster. A wife is not a subordinate, but she is her own grievance committee. When treated as an underling, she may well decide to engage in a little moonlighting - or walk out for good.
  6. Generally speaking, most women seem to prefer that the male be (at least superficially) the dominant partner in a relationship. Even so, not even the most dynamic male can long keep the love and respect of a woman he bullies, browbeats and tries to deprive of her own individuality. Being the dominant partner is one thing- to be domineering is another, and usually destructive to a relationship.
  7. Every man goes through a phase during which he views sex solely in quantitative terms, proudly counting his conquests, his chest swelling as the numbers increase. Eventually - it is to be hoped - the attitude is transformed by discernment and sensitivity. Then quality - in the sense of an appreciation of emotional and intellectual gratification and not merely a desire for physical pleasure - replaces quantity as a criterion.