Latest / The Lila Rose Show / E:91 Red Pill and Prenups with Zuby

Transcript

E:91 Red Pill and Prenups with Zuby · The Lila Rose Show

0:00
I do see some crossover in the red pillar Tradcon space where
0:03
they're saying some of the same things, but then obviously
0:05
really key differences. What are those sort of unique
0:08
insights that you think are true that people need to hear?
0:10
Yeah, sure, boy. Where do we begin here?
0:12
Going back to the tweet and what I understood your position to
0:14
be, which is that if you are a man of means or a woman of means
0:17
and you are entering a union, you should ensure that you can
0:20
protect those means in case something goes wrong in the
0:22
union. And I think that general
0:24
approach to marriage is not a good. 1.
0:26
OK. So and not one we should be
0:27
recommending that large that's that's my position.
0:29
Yeah. My point is simply whether or
0:31
not someone has a prenuptial agreement, they have a
0:33
prenuptial agreement. It's either you have the default
0:35
from the state or let us set the terms.
0:43
Hey guys, welcome back to the Lila Rose podcast.
0:45
So I just got finished having a conversation, a very long and
0:48
great conversation with my dear friend Zooby and he is in town
0:51
and we were filming for his podcast.
0:53
We are getting into Red pill versus Tradcon stuff, the
0:57
division between men and women today and how to heal it.
1:00
And then we started talking about prenups, prenuptial
1:04
agreements. And so we're going to actually
1:06
pick up kind of where we left off and just go for this
1:08
episode. Thanks for joining.
1:10
And Zubi, thanks for being back in California.
1:13
Great to. Have you here Grace the Grace
1:15
the State? A big thank you to our podcast
1:17
sponsor, 7 Weeks Coffee. Seven Weeks Coffee is small
1:20
batch, ethically sourced and gourmet coffee that is
1:23
delicious. I love the Ethiopian medium
1:25
roast. They have all kinds of delicious
1:27
roast and blends on the site. And what I love about 7 weeks
1:30
coffee.com is that when you order that bag of delicious
1:33
coffee, you are supporting the pro-life movement.
1:35
In fact, 10% of everything that you spend at
1:38
sevenweekscoffee.com goes directly to fund the Pregnancy
1:41
Resource Center movement. So it helps moms and babies in
1:43
need and directly gets donated from 7 weeks Coffee to the
1:47
Pregnancy Resource Center movement.
1:49
So check out Seven Weeks coffee.com today.
1:51
Order a delicious batch of coffee.
1:53
You can actually become a monthly subscriber, which is a
1:56
great way to save money and get delicious coffee to your door
1:59
every single month. And that's seven weeks
2:01
coffee.com. Use the code Lila at checkout
2:04
for 10% off your order. That's Lila at checkout for 10%
2:07
off your order. I know you've been all over the
2:10
world since we last talked. You were on the show, I think 7
2:13
or 8 months ago and you continue, I think to bring light
2:17
where you go. I like how you bring, you try to
2:20
bring harmony to some of the crazy conversations and some
2:24
some light into into where you go.
2:26
So anyways, we got into a little bit of a Twitter discussion a
2:31
couple months back. Now it's been a few months about
2:34
prenups. It was in the context of kind of
2:37
red pill Tradcon meta debates happening.
2:42
OK, let's start with this because people who listen to the
2:44
podcast already have heard about red pill stuff to some degree.
2:47
Tradcon. Let's just start with defining
2:49
our terms a little bit because I think there's a lot of
2:53
confusion, I think about what these terms even mean now.
2:56
So maybe, maybe we can start there.
2:58
OK. With with just terms, OK.
3:00
And welcome to the show. Thanks for being here.
3:01
I'm happy to be here. So Tradcon, I mean that is just
3:06
stands for a traditional conservative, so.
3:08
Am IA Tradcon. Yeah, pretty much.
3:11
You're Catholic. I mean you can't really get more
3:12
Tradcon then, OK. But tradcon can look different.
3:15
Yeah, of course. I mean, you could have a Muslim
3:17
Tradcon, you could have Jewish Tradcon.
3:19
I guess you could You have non religious trad con, I guess you
3:24
could, but it's would be so rare that it might not be worth
3:28
discussion. So someone just traditional,
3:31
traditionally conservative, usually a religious background
3:36
and strong faith which one adheres to that could be
3:40
Orthodox Jewish, it could be Catholic, could be Evangelical.
3:44
Whatever the case may be, that doesn't even matter, but just
3:47
trying to live by and do everything by the book.
3:51
But they don't always agree with each other, right?
3:53
Because I've seen that even in the trad con space.
3:55
No, no, there's different, There's still different
3:56
opinions, there's still different personalities.
3:59
But yeah, politically, certainly socially conservative, but even
4:04
usually politically conservative, the fiscal
4:07
argument might, I think it's more about social conservatism
4:10
than necessary necessarily what people might call fiscal
4:13
conservatism. So I'd say socially conservative
4:16
views and that includes around things with, you know,
4:19
relationships, marriage, sex, family, children.
4:23
So typically like pro-life, pro marriage against divorce, open
4:28
to life, like having a, you know, big family, some
4:31
traditional gender roles in terms of like women should
4:33
really be there for their kids and, and men too, but men are
4:36
typically like the provider, the leader of the family
4:40
economically typically, again, there's obviously women
4:43
assisting and things like that. I'm just trying to kind of lay
4:45
the the ground towards for how it typically looks.
4:48
Yeah. I mean, you, you definitely, if
4:50
you're a traditional conservative, then you certainly
4:52
know that there are only two sexes and that they differ, but
4:55
also that there are gender roles as well.
4:59
If someone totally rejects the idea of gender roles, they're
5:02
probably not going to fall into the Tradcon bucket because
5:05
that's more liberal or progressive.
5:08
I think in the space of tradcon, there's extremes too, or people
5:11
that are in different parts of the spectrum, because I know
5:12
some people who call themselves trad cons who say women
5:14
shouldn't vote and you know, women should never work.
5:18
It's wrong, you know, wrong for women to work and things like
5:20
that. And I think if your work is
5:22
getting in the way of your mothering and you're you don't
5:26
have to be doing that work, then that's a problem.
5:28
You know, obviously in today's economy, you often need
5:31
additional income. It's hard to do it on one
5:33
salary, etcetera. But so yeah, there's a lot of
5:35
obviously those variations. But I think typically speaking
5:38
like you're saying, pro marriage, pro-life.
5:40
Like gender, you know, tread cones are on a spectrum.
5:42
Just just kidding. Just kidding.
5:44
Yeah, there's there's there's a spectrum of beliefs in
5:46
everything, just like there is in liberalism, conservative in,
5:49
in Christianity. Gosh, I mean, let alone even in
5:53
specific denominations of it. You've obviously got the main
5:55
tranches of Protestant, Catholic, and Orthodox, but then
6:00
within those you've got factions.
6:02
Within those you've got denominations.
6:03
And within those denominations and even congregations, every
6:07
single person standing or sitting in that church is going
6:09
to have slightly different views on things because we're, we're
6:13
all individuals, the individuals, the ultimate
6:15
minority. But sometimes we need to be able
6:18
to use shorthand to have conversations.
6:20
Otherwise all conversations are impossible.
6:23
So red pill, How would you define red pill?
6:26
Yeah, So this is something that is what what's interesting about
6:30
the sort of red pill terminology, obviously it's from
6:32
the Matrix. So Morpheus offers Neo, you can
6:36
take the blue pill and he stays in this sort of dreamland.
6:38
He doesn't know how things really work and what the
6:41
dynamics of the world are. Or he can take the red pill and
6:44
the sort of scales fall from his eyes and he can see all the
6:47
intricacies and details of how everything really works.
6:51
So the original idea of the red pill, by the way, the the
6:53
terminology dates back 2020 plus years, even when used as applied
6:58
to gender dynamics. What's weird is in the past sort
7:01
of two to three years, there's been a sort of resurgence it,
7:04
it's been mainstreamed in a certain way, at least online.
7:07
There have been a sort of handful of influencers,
7:09
Youtubers, podcasters who have made people aware of the term in
7:14
a way that they weren't before in its originality.
7:19
I've got to give credit to a man named Rolo Tomasi here, because
7:22
he's kind of the person who sort of wrote the the wrote the
7:24
foundational text. 20 years. Ago, man.
7:28
When did the first rational male book come out?
7:30
I mean, I think he's been blogging for about 20 years.
7:33
First book I think came out over a decade ago but.
7:36
Sometimes he tweets at me. Oh yeah, yeah.
7:38
OK, Yeah. And I and I was the fresh and
7:41
fit podcast recently came out Myron from it saying he wants to
7:44
host a conversation. I think you were.
7:47
I know. I'm happy to moderate it.
7:49
Tweets around but I told Myron I'm I'm open to doing that and I
7:52
would be open to talking to. Really.
7:53
Yeah, that, that's cool because I'm in such a weird space
7:57
because. I'd be great to have you there.
7:58
I'm connected. I'm connected to like,
7:59
everybody. Yeah.
8:00
So it's kind of strange when I see some of these battles and
8:02
things going on online or all the back and forth, 'cause I'm
8:05
like, I know every single person here.
8:07
I've recorded with all these people.
8:08
I've met all these people in person.
8:10
So there's this disconnect that typically exists between these
8:13
two worlds, meaning like. There's there's assumptions
8:18
about agreements and disagreements that are not
8:19
actually in reality, like we actually agree on these things
8:23
or disagree on these things. What I mean is even even in
8:25
social circles, I mean you're not going to find a lot of
8:27
people who know and have recorded with Matt Walsh, Ben
8:32
Shapiro, Candace Owens, Mike, all the Daily Wire people and
8:36
yourself and been on Christian podcasts and so on.
8:39
But I've also been on, I've been on Fresh and Fit 6 times.
8:43
I've, I've met Rolo Tomasi, like I've been on a show with him.
8:47
He's been on my podcast. I've, I, I just talked to
8:50
everybody. I talked to everyone.
8:52
I'm kind of cool with everyone and I try to see things from the
8:54
different angles and I also don't get involved in most of
8:58
the spats that Twitter back and forth 'cause I'd rather just
9:01
talk to people in real life and try to think of what's useful.
9:04
But in in in proper terms. I guess Red Pill is not supposed
9:08
to be an ideology but a praxeology, just a way of
9:11
understanding the world and the the nature of men, the nature of
9:16
women, how those gender dynamics interact.
9:20
It's not supposed to be something that gives
9:23
prescriptions or advice or says what is right and wrong.
9:26
It's just like this is how men are, this is how women are.
9:29
These are some things you can expect.
9:30
This is how they sort of evolutionary biology informed.
9:34
So it's like, it's how general you would say it's like in a way
9:36
like. A sociological study of gender
9:39
and as it pertains to gender dynamics in particular, Yeah.
9:42
Because I see, I see a lot of, I see a lot of advice being given
9:46
out by people in the red pill space and obviously all over the
9:48
Internet, everyone's giving advice.
9:50
I give advice I think. It's kind of hard not.
9:52
To but like, you know, how you should date if you should marry,
9:56
you know, there's that viral treat from Rolo saying, you
9:59
know, get a vasectomy, don't get married.
10:02
And then he was like, I'm trolling, you know, I think he
10:05
was. So I I see all of that and you
10:07
know, obviously. I think it's a shame that
10:09
that's, like his probably one of his best known pieces of content
10:12
on the Internet, given that it was like one of the goofiest and
10:15
he's actually written a lot of very valuable and interesting
10:19
stuff. Yeah.
10:20
Well, well, we could even just go there.
10:22
I mean, I want to talk about the prenup stuff because you and I,
10:25
you know, I know we're tweeting back and forth about it publicly
10:27
and I do want to just have that conversation too.
10:30
I am interested, I'm very interested in hearing you and
10:33
kind of unpack what are the things that you think are the
10:37
most uniquely the, you know, the unique offerings that someone
10:41
like Arolo has that are true Because, and I say unique
10:45
because, you know, there you can, I do see some crossover in
10:49
the red, red pillar Tradcon space where they're saying some
10:52
of the same things. You know, there's some, some
10:55
similarities, but then obviously really key differences.
10:58
So I, I let's, let's go to that 'cause I am curious, like what
11:01
are those sort of unique insights that you think are true
11:03
that aren't that people need to hear?
11:05
Yeah, sure. So boy, where do we begin here?
11:08
I guess the first thing is that radical notion that men and
11:13
women are different. Because I think like every track
11:16
on would say that my Catholic faith teaches me that, you know,
11:19
human nature, biology. Prior to prior to 2012, it would
11:24
not need to be said, but we now live in a time where, you know,
11:27
that that that does not just mean that we look different or
11:31
have slightly different body structures and, you know,
11:33
reproductive parts and so on. But our interests are
11:37
proclivities and specifically our dating and mating strategies
11:43
from an animalistic evolutionary biology perspective are
11:47
different as it pertains to women.
11:51
I know in say, Rolo's writing, there's a lot, lot of, lot of
11:54
conversation about hypergamy, which is something that is
11:57
simply saying that women tend to date and mate across and up in
12:01
terms of socio economic or status hierarchies.
12:05
Jordan Peterson has talked about this many, many times.
12:08
If you look in any culture, anytime, any nation, women
12:12
typically it, it's the whole wanting a man who's taller and
12:16
who earns more money. If you want to boil it down to a
12:18
a sort of simple modern ways to to measure those things.
12:22
Whereas men are not hypergamous, we don't most men.
12:26
In fact, the more in fact, the more traditional a man is,
12:29
probably the less he cares about how much his wife or from a wife
12:34
or. I guess you'd say the hypergamy
12:36
if you use that term, it just looks different, like men.
12:38
Maybe that kind of high status man and using those kind of red
12:41
pill terms is looking for like a woman with a particular
12:44
aesthetic who physically lives up to a certain standard he has
12:48
or you know, she has a certain kind of level of self-care that
12:51
he's seeking and how she presents herself.
12:53
Whatever you. Know, I think both both men and
12:55
women, you know, want to sort of best mate that they can get.
12:59
But it's like, how do you define the best mate?
13:01
And I think that's where it all all the differences shake out.
13:04
Like, I guess the point is that the way men and women define
13:06
that is different. Of course there's overlap, yeah,
13:10
but the things that women are generally attracted to in men
13:13
are not necessarily the same things that men are generally.
13:16
But I'm attracted to, I guess what I'm curious about is like
13:18
is and then we'll move on from roller to the prenup
13:22
conversation and try to see what we can make there.
13:23
But but what I'm curious about is like, OK, you mentioned some
13:26
things, but you're like Jordan Peterson says that and I'm like
13:28
Chad Khan say some. Of that, OK, like what are they?
13:30
Unique, like what would be something that you think what's
13:33
unique 'cause I 'cause the unique stuff I yeah, just to be
13:36
candid, like the unique stuff I see from the red.
13:38
Pill World women's dating and mating strategy may change as
13:41
over the course of her depending on how old she is.
13:44
Like the whole phase theory. Over the her age.
13:47
As I've seen it, if you. Want to put it that bluntly.
13:49
I mean, that's what I see in college.
13:50
And you know, dual, dual mating strategies.
13:53
So in different phases, different times and places,
13:57
there being multiple, there's more than one mating strategy
14:01
that either a man or a woman can adopt.
14:05
We're both fans of monogamy. But obviously, you know,
14:08
polygyny, polygamy is a, is an as a mating strategy.
14:11
We talked before of if you're a man who has a lot of status and
14:15
a lot of resources at any time in human history, pretty much
14:19
probably at an all time low right now, but it would have
14:22
been normal. Oh, you can afford three wives,
14:24
then have three wives. You can afford 10 wives, then
14:26
have 10 wives. So you're saying that's kind of
14:29
the more unique aspect of red pill that was different from
14:31
your trad Connor or Jordan Peterson where they're saying
14:34
women typically go through. I mean, the argument I've seen
14:37
if correct me if I'm wrong, let me hear if I hear this
14:39
correctly. This is good prep If we do have
14:40
a conversation. It's like that women go through
14:43
this phase where they're really promiscuous and then they want
14:45
to settle down or, you know, women, you know, high status men
14:49
are more naturally bent and should want polygamy.
14:52
They would they or polygamy, I should say they would want to
14:55
have multiple wives and that that's not necessarily and my my
14:59
impression of it is a lot of the red pillars say that's not a bad
15:01
thing that men should have high status.
15:03
Men should have access to multiple have multiple families.
15:07
It's not a big. Deal.
15:07
I think this is when people start putting their sort of own
15:09
personal opinion and advice bringing into it, certainly in
15:14
the original form of a lot of red pill thought.
15:18
It was just like, this is what it is.
15:20
This is this is what the proclivities are.
15:22
This is what our natural tendencies are.
15:25
And then of course you have society, you have religion, you
15:28
have culture, you have laws, you have all these things on top of
15:30
it to take people out of their just raw base nature and mating
15:35
strategies and implement some type of thing that actually
15:39
works in society, like marriage. And acknowledge that they have
15:44
free will and a soul you know we're not just animals with.
15:46
So I guess you could say a lot of the red pill thought is OK if
15:49
we were just if you removed all of the restrictions and
15:55
structures of society, what would males and females do right
16:01
around the animal Kingdom? How do the males typically
16:04
behave? How do the females typically
16:05
behave? How are their mating patterns
16:07
different in order to ensure the survival of the species?
16:10
So I guess in the most raw, raw sense, you could say the red
16:14
pill is just sort of taking away from aspects of morality and
16:19
ethics and social conditioning and whatever.
16:21
What is the sort of raw state of man?
16:24
What's the raw state of women? You're always going to be
16:26
generalizing as it as it pertains to mating and
16:31
intersexual dynamics. I guess that's really what it
16:33
is. I think in the in the last
16:35
couple years, it's become quite tainted by people's personal
16:39
opinions and advice of oh, well, I think you should do this or I
16:42
think you should do that or whatever.
16:44
And the justification might be like, OK, well this is our
16:46
natural state. You know, someone might say, oh,
16:48
well, marriage and monogamous are not natural per SE.
16:51
That's not sort of the natural state, the natural state of a
16:53
man, especially if he's able to and has status and whatever and
16:57
he's tall and he's good looking and he has money, then his
17:01
natural proclivity is to mate with all the attractive
17:05
reproductive age women that that he can.
17:08
And then something people will take that a step further and
17:10
say, OK, and that's therefore he should where I think, you know,
17:13
we'd both be like, no, like that's not, that's not right,
17:17
that's not right. That's not moral, that's not
17:18
appropriate. That's not good for society.
17:20
That's not good for individuals. It's not good for children.
17:23
But yeah, this is when people start overlaying, I think, their
17:25
personal stuff on it. Well, it's interesting because
17:27
it all comes back to the question of like, what is human
17:29
nature? Like, what does it mean to be
17:31
human? And also what does it mean to be
17:32
a man and a woman? And if depending on your answer,
17:35
you can come to very different outcomes and how we should
17:37
behave or what is acceptable, what are acceptable ways for us
17:41
to behave. And so I think if, if it is, if
17:43
your view of like a man's nature is that he is, you know, animal
17:47
and which he is animal. We are humans are animals, you
17:50
know, we are creatures. And therefore he should, you
17:53
know, he has this urge to, as you say, maybe procreate with
17:56
all these, you know, reproductive age women,
17:58
whatever, right? But then you remember, like man
18:00
is animal, but man is also soul. He's also rational.
18:03
And he's also given this the gift of the intellect.
18:07
And we know based on, you know, what our intellect can teach us
18:11
that we're not just to, you know, not just that we aren't
18:13
just to behave like animals, but it's also not good for us to
18:15
just behave like animals. Like, you know, it actually
18:18
brings a lifetime of sorrow to have, you know, 1000 sexual
18:22
partners and, you know, 100 children out of wedlock.
18:25
And like, you know, so, so it's amazing though, to see that, you
18:28
know, even if we behaved, if we behaved purely like the animals
18:33
and followed our base instincts, it would not bring some sort of
18:36
freedom or happiness. It would actually bring total
18:39
civilizational. Demise we, we, we quite
18:41
literally run the experiment. It wasn't that I, I was not
18:44
alive in the 1960s, but it seems like across the modern Western
18:48
Anglosphere, the 1960s was this whole rise of the, you know,
18:53
free love or whatever someone wants to call it, that sort of
18:56
hippie movement, massive liberalization of all of these,
18:59
these social standards and religious codes and so on.
19:02
And 60 plus years later, I think we are very much seeing the
19:07
consequences of it all. That's what we're living
19:09
through. That's what we are trying to
19:11
decipher and pull apart right now.
19:13
It's like, oh, that experiment, that experiment ran and it
19:16
didn't seem to really make men and women happier in general.
19:20
It seems to be causing quite a lot of mental health problems,
19:22
let alone all the children growing up in places, you know,
19:26
households with absent fathers. Rise of single motherhood, rise
19:29
of abortion, actual rise of unwanted pregnancies, which
19:32
ironically came out of through the pill.
19:35
There were more unwanted pregnancies than prior to it,
19:38
which people would not have expected.
19:40
So yeah, we're trying to untangle the mess now.
19:42
Yeah. So I think the biggest sort of
19:44
concern about red pill is where you take there to the raw human
19:47
nature analysis of like the man versus the woman.
19:50
And you can kind of draw different theories or
19:52
conclusions around it. And some may be more or less
19:54
true or more or less not. But then you start to add on the
19:57
praxeology of therefore it's OK or it's understandable for you
20:00
to just go do this and we're not going to don't be too.
20:03
Yeah. Then you add on that and that's
20:04
what I see the most. Stuff honestly and that's where
20:07
there's the biggest disagreement right so anyways it would be
20:10
very cool I think to have that conversation I'm totally down
20:14
we'll see we'll see if it materials I'm due in April so
20:17
I'm like I I I sent a message on on Twitter recently I was like
20:21
hey I'm down but it has to be like very soon because I'm going
20:24
to be out of Commission in a few weeks but differences between
20:27
men and women right there I respect it yeah I respect it
20:31
massively thank you to our podcast sponsornimiskincare.com.
20:35
I'm very picky about my skin care products.
20:36
I always change products. I never liked the products I
20:39
have and when I discovered nimiskincare.com a few months
20:42
ago, I fell in love. Their products are simple and
20:44
clean and easy to use and they're really designed for any
20:48
kind of skin. So you can have these great
20:49
products and you can mix and match them based on your skin
20:52
type. I love their dehydration cream,
20:54
I use their vitamin C scrub, and I also love their brightening
20:58
sunscreen that I put on every single morning.
21:01
What I love about nimiskincare.com is not just
21:03
that it's a great product and one that I think you'll love,
21:05
but it also is a pro-life company.
21:07
So this is a company that shares your values.
21:09
It's pro-life and pro family. So when you're ordering from
21:12
Nimi Skin Care, you know you're not supporting causes that you
21:15
oppose, but actually causes that you love.
21:17
So go to nimiskincare.com today. That's Nimi skincare.com and you
21:23
can use the code Lila at checkout for 15% off your first
21:26
order. That's the code Lila at checkout
21:28
for 15% off your order at nimiskincare.com.
21:32
We also were talking on Twitter a little bit about prenuptials
21:35
because you had a tweet that came out.
21:36
I don't. I can't even remember how the
21:37
conversation started. I think it was because you
21:39
tweeted something. I I'm not going to pull it up.
21:42
It'll take too long. But it basically, correct me if
21:43
I'm wrong, as I remember it was saying, you know, you're
21:46
basically saying it would be foolish for a man who was of
21:50
great means, like a millionaire. I think was the term you used to
21:53
not have a prenup. And you know, it's a very
21:56
definitive statement. Basically, if you're a wealthy
21:58
man, you need a prenup and it's foolish not to.
22:01
And I responded by saying saying no, I don't agree.
22:05
And, and there was our disagreement.
22:07
But basically, you know. That conversation went like 4
22:10
days off. And maybe we did go back and
22:12
forth a little bit. And, and again, my position
22:14
isn't that every prenup is always wrong.
22:17
It's more that having a principle that because I am
22:19
wealthy and I have these, you know, material assets, therefore
22:23
if I marry, I must protect those material assets from a woman who
22:25
might go astray in the future in our marriage.
22:28
I think that's the wrong view to enter a marriage with.
22:30
And that was what I was attempting to communicate.
22:32
Make it online and Twitter, Twitter tweets, you know X it's
22:35
not even Twitter. That ended up like a
22:36
conversation with me versus like trying to battle like 1000
22:39
people. Oh.
22:40
Yeah, and then everyone, everyone's piling on, you know,
22:43
which is fun. Like that's X.
22:44
Like that is fun. Thank you, Elon Musk, for X.
22:46
But anyways, I'd love to hear your yeah, let's just talk about
22:49
for a little bit. I'd love to hear your your take
22:51
on that. Yeah, absolutely.
22:53
So, man, there's so many different angles I can approach
22:55
this from. So I think the first thing
22:56
that's probably worth saying is I would have had the same
23:00
reaction perhaps even as recently as one year ago.
23:04
I used to, you know, I think the term prenup itself is probably
23:10
popularized by Kanye West gold digger song and like sort of
23:13
mainstream media. But I also used to view for the
23:17
vast majority of my life the idea of a prenup meaning that,
23:20
oh, there's a there's a lack of trust or someone's entering
23:23
with, you know, like not wanting to be all in that type of thing.
23:27
That was the sort of meme in my head that I guess I had just
23:31
absorbed a bit like prior to becoming explicitly pro-life, I
23:35
had just kind of adopted the societal meme of like, oh, like
23:39
being. I never liked the idea of a
23:41
board. I never really thought about it
23:42
all. But when I actually did like
23:44
research and listen to people and actually did some reading on
23:47
the topic, I was like, oh, I have changed my mind on this.
23:51
So that is, this is probably the issue I've most recently issue
23:55
of significance. I've most recently changed my
23:57
mind on. So what changed?
23:58
Your mind information just learning more learning more
24:01
about what it is, what it isn't, the different reasons why people
24:07
and it why why a couple may may have one and get 1.
24:11
So first of all, I think that when it comes to what marriage
24:16
is supposed to be, as by God's design and intention, I think we
24:23
are very much on the same page from what I know about your
24:27
beliefs. I also think that sadly in the
24:31
modern world we are in the minority of truly having that
24:39
belief of a lifelong covenant binding 2 people and their
24:42
families in front of God. That's not to be ripped apart
24:45
for random frivolous reasons. That's just that sadly, that's,
24:51
that's where we are. This is the reality of, of where
24:53
we are right now. So I think that my point being
24:56
made in that original. Oh, and, and let me let me add
25:00
one more thing 'cause I think one of the most important points
25:02
is that every, if you're going to get married in the legal
25:08
system, state government approval, so on, all of this
25:11
stuff goes pretty much out the window.
25:13
If you're just talking about two people coming together, having a
25:15
church wedding or synagogue wedding, whatever, and not
25:18
signing all the documents and all the legality of it.
25:21
This is talking about the legality is that you're already
25:24
entering into a legal contract and you're under a set of laws
25:27
in a jurisdiction and that jurisdiction essentially has a
25:33
default prenuptial agreement. And most people actually, when
25:37
they get married, they don't actually know what they're
25:39
signing up for. They don't.
25:40
It's not like a a contract and they they read through all the
25:42
documentation of what it means for their finances.
25:44
For their common law marriage is has you, you could argue has
25:47
this sort of there are rules that engage even that like if
25:51
you've lived together for longer, things like that.
25:53
Yes, and, and, and people don't generally know.
25:55
So I would say that if someone is choosing to get married
25:59
legally, you already are, you're already signing a contract.
26:03
People say, oh, religious people like say it's not a covenant,
26:06
it's a contract. I'm like, I'll it's, it's both.
26:08
It's, it's a contract. If, if you are legally getting
26:10
married, you are signing, you're literally signing a contract.
26:13
And it's not only one of the most important decisions you
26:18
make in your life, it's also the most important financial
26:20
decision you make in your life. And there is no other contract
26:26
where people would not that's of significance where people
26:29
wouldn't read through the terms and actually, even if they can
26:34
negotiate it to be what, what they would like it to be.
26:38
So my point is simply whether or not someone has a prenuptial
26:41
agreement, they have a prenuptial agreement.
26:43
It's either you have the default from the state or as a couple,
26:47
man, woman who are like, hey, we want to do this thing, we want
26:50
to be together, whatever. All it's saying is let us set
26:54
the terms. So, I mean, I, I hear what
26:56
you're saying, but I think that the big question is this, which
26:59
is that of course, like there are rules that govern, you can
27:03
say rules that govern marriage to the extent of, you know,
27:07
obviously there's tax law, you know, if you're filing as
27:10
married versus not, but you know, you can file as married
27:13
versus not when you're married. Like those are decisions you can
27:15
make. But if you were to separate, you
27:18
know, there's how the assets might be divided.
27:20
And I think that's where the the rub is, is my understanding with
27:23
your position. And so I guess the first big
27:25
question I have is what do you see in the current stat, you
27:28
know, the current law system? Because it sounds like, again,
27:31
your tweet is about protecting money from someone who might go
27:34
astray in the future of your marriage, by the way.
27:36
OK, well, 'cause you you. Have a Should I go through?
27:38
Should I go through what I think are the?
27:40
What are the potential benefits of?
27:42
Well, let's let's start with the existing law, 'cause you're
27:44
you're saying the existing law is basically a prenup that
27:47
governs if the marriage dissolves or divorces.
27:49
So what would you say are the issues, maybe the top three or
27:53
the top 2 with the existing law that are unfair in how they
27:57
govern, you know, how kind of a divorce settlement court might
28:00
treat, you know, the assets of the divorcing parties or
28:03
something? OK.
28:04
So there are, it depends on jurisdiction.
28:06
There are places where there are places where premarital,
28:11
premarital assets are completely off the table and there are
28:15
places where they're not. So again, this is coming back to
28:18
the there's already a default prenuptial agreement, so someone
28:21
might be living in a place where.
28:24
Like a nation like America versus.
28:26
Yeah, and, and a nation in a state where.
28:28
So let's say someone's getting married and they're 40 years
28:31
old. They've been working for the
28:32
past 22 years. They've accumulated assets.
28:35
They own properties, they have a, they own a company or they've
28:38
got a stake in a company, whatever it is.
28:39
They have stocks. They've got whatever it is all
28:43
accumulated before they even perhaps met, let alone married
28:47
the person they're marrying. This, this is not even about
28:49
men, women. This is just people, right?
28:50
You've. Like an you have an inheritance.
28:52
Is it? Yeah.
28:53
So you've got whatever, whatever the case may be.
28:56
And so I think it is obvious that any premarital assets in
29:02
the event in the, you know, God forsaken event of of a divorce,
29:06
that should not even that that should be off the table.
29:09
You shouldn't be. Oh, like I bought a property
29:11
when I was 25 years old before like 18 years before I met this
29:15
person and somehow they're entitled to like that's bonkers.
29:20
That should not even. Be a thing I'd be curious to
29:22
unpack that a little bit because I think, you know, for example,
29:25
let's say let's just take a scenario and let's let's try to
29:27
talk about maybe America and UK just because you're right,
29:30
endless there's endless countries with endless laws.
29:32
But for the sake of kind of this conversation of, you know, if
29:35
you're a millionaire, you need a prenup kind of argument that I
29:38
that I was trying to. Get married with that.
29:41
One, well, you know, should Elon get married?
29:43
I don't know, like that's another question.
29:45
But anyways, I wish he'd I, I mean, I by the way, Elon Musk,
29:49
who I, I think he's done some really interesting and amazing
29:52
things, but like he has all these children and he, he had, I
29:55
think four or five kids with his first wife, you know, so it's
29:58
just a not to pass judgement because I don't know his
30:00
personal circumstances, but it's like, imagine if you had Elon
30:04
stay with his first wife and stay with his as a father.
30:07
I. Don't know who, I don't know who
30:10
it would, as they say. Who knows?
30:13
Who knows? Women Women follow the majority
30:15
of. Divorces.
30:16
Yeah, we don't we don't know the details.
30:17
Thank you to our sponsoreverylife.com.
30:19
everylife.com is America's baby products company.
30:23
They have diapers and wipes for your little one.
30:25
These are great quality products that are great for your little
30:27
one's skin that are ethically sourced.
30:29
And what I love about everylife.com is unlike Pampers
30:33
and Huggies, which are actually companies that support abortion,
30:36
believe it or not, everylife.com is a pro-life company that
30:40
donates money back to the pro-life movement.
30:42
So when you get these great products for your baby, you're
30:45
also supporting the pro-life movement and you're not
30:48
supporting abortion. So check out everylife.com
30:50
today. You're going to love the brand,
30:51
you're going to love the products.
30:52
They're great. And you can use the code Lila at
30:54
checkout for 10% off your order. That's everylife.com.
30:58
And you can use the code Lila at checkout for 10% off your order.
31:01
But anyways, back to kind of like, you know, where we're at
31:04
today, let's just say someone gets married.
31:06
They, like you said, they bought a house or they bought some
31:08
property that's like an, an investment property.
31:10
Let's say there were 21 and they're, you know, now they're
31:13
28. I don't know, it has accrued in
31:16
value. They get married to a woman, she
31:18
doesn't really have many assets, but they get married and then
31:20
they have like 4 kids together, right?
31:23
And then God forbid there's a divorce of some kind that starts
31:27
to happen, like initiated by one or the other, right?
31:31
She has raised those kids in the last five to 10 years.
31:34
Like she's not been making money or, you know, investing in new
31:37
rental properties or anything. She's her primary work has been
31:40
the the children. Maybe she's had some side
31:42
hustles, he's been continuing to grow his income and the rental
31:46
property is one of his assets and now they're separating and
31:50
she is going to need to be able to provide for those children
31:54
when she has her shared custody of them or whatever.
31:56
She's been out of the job market now for years.
31:59
Whatever. Anyways, my understanding,
32:01
again, I'm not a I'm not a family law attorney, so it would
32:04
be interesting to have one on the show.
32:05
Maybe I should. That's actually the next step.
32:08
But you know, she is entitled to some of his assets because even
32:12
though she wasn't working and they didn't belong to belong to
32:15
them before they got married, because she has been providing
32:18
something to the family unit that has an economic value that
32:21
you can't write off as nothing. And.
32:23
That's. But why should she?
32:24
Why would she be entitled to the premarital assets?
32:27
Well, I, I, that would be a question of like how much of it
32:30
she's entitled to versus not, I think in part because they're in
32:35
part because I would say they're growing in value, I would
32:37
imagine during their marriage, but.
32:39
It's his. But when he married her and she
32:42
chose to invest in much of her time and heart in raising those
32:45
children, like what is his became hers too, you know, So I
32:48
think that's. Yeah, I, I think that that in
32:51
itself is, is the huge problem. And as long as the law remains
32:55
that way, all that's going to happen is more men who or, or
32:58
women at this stage, because women are starting to have a lot
33:01
of stuff. I think young women are actually
33:02
more likely to have property than men are now.
33:04
Then all that's going to happen is fewer and fewer people will
33:07
get married, because that's such a poor incentive.
33:10
Well, I think it, I think the biggest question is not even if
33:14
they should divvy up that premarital asset they had before
33:18
marriage 2/3, half and half at all.
33:21
If the biggest question is if, if and when you get married, you
33:26
know, are you going into the marriage with concern about your
33:29
assets and protecting them from their spouse?
33:32
That might go the wrong way. Or are you going into the
33:34
marriage in terms of this is my one flesh I'm going to be
33:37
committed to for life and I'm going to really select the best?
33:39
Let me ask you a question. Do you think that people should
33:41
get married with the state involvement and sign the papers
33:45
and sign the legal contracts? I think it's good to, provided
33:48
you don't have some very defunct state because you, if you're
33:51
like, if I'm in like the Soviet Union and I'm getting secretly
33:54
marriage underground by the Catholic Church, which is
33:56
illegal, yeah, I'm not going to give this.
33:58
I probably won't want the state involved in my marriage.
34:00
I think, you know, it depends on the country, but generally
34:02
speaking, yes. State involved is important or
34:05
good. Because I think the purpose of
34:07
the state, besides rule of law and defending and protecting
34:10
basic human rights, is to create an environment for flourishing
34:13
families. So there should be actually
34:15
state incentives to get married. But we have state disincentives.
34:19
Well, it depends who you're asking, because if you're
34:21
talking to the woman who is giving up, you know, so much of
34:24
her physical body and her time in her life.
34:26
What? If the woman has more assets
34:28
than the man and she wanted and she's the one.
34:30
Who I think there's going to be endless scenarios that are
34:33
unique about assets about like this person had a little more
34:36
money, this person had a little more money.
34:37
But that's why I think the general principle about marriage
34:40
should be all in. We're going to combine our
34:44
assets. This is as a general principle,
34:46
right? Again, I'm not saying there
34:47
aren't some cases where it could be as an exception, not a rule,
34:52
perhaps prudent, especially if the country you live in has some
34:55
crazy laws, to have some sort of premarital agreement.
34:58
But I think generally speaking, whether you're wealthy or poor,
35:02
entering a marriage should be an exercise of an all.
35:05
But we have. We live again.
35:06
We live in a time where. Is that the nature of marriage?
35:08
It's the nature of marriage. It's supposed to be, but it's
35:10
not. But it's.
35:12
Not so, yeah, in the US, the divorce rate, let let's take the
35:16
average of the things people say.
35:17
It's it's hovering around 40%. It's hovering around 40%.
35:21
At large, but when you when you break that statistic down and
35:24
you look at different groups for sure.
35:25
Divorce. Is much higher around.
35:27
Like if you're a group that selects to marry in a certain
35:31
way, has certain values to have, certain behaviors and practices,
35:33
you can bring it down. Your outcomes are much better,
35:35
meaning there's much lower rates of divorce.
35:38
So if you just take a general population at large and you say,
35:41
well, they're all divorcing, so they all should have prenups, I
35:44
think that's not making for a good plan for, you know, that
35:48
society to advance. I don't understand the the
35:51
opposition to so my my the reason I'm in favor of prenups
35:54
is because number one IA huge question with all of these
35:58
things I'd ask is, well, why leave that up to the state?
36:01
Why leave? Why leave that up to the States
36:03
and the courts? So if the people getting
36:05
married, if they do want to go moral in and they want to
36:08
consider premarital ass and join everything together.
36:11
My point is you, the couple rather than lawyers and this web
36:15
of whoever it is, you can make all those agree you you, you
36:19
just say what we agree. This is what this is what it is.
36:23
You can, you can your, your prenup can be as as simple or as
36:26
complicated or whatever it is. So I think a major part of it is
36:30
to even force these discussions and avoid future arguments.
36:34
Finance is one of the finances and assets.
36:35
Those are one of the biggest things that tear people apart in
36:38
relationships and marriages and so on.
36:40
This can even involve people outside of those two
36:43
individuals, other family members you've mentioned
36:46
inherited inheritances, all this kind of stuff.
36:49
You know, if you, if you are, if you own a company or you're a
36:52
member of a company and so on. All of these things get
36:55
increasingly complicated. So what you can do is you can
36:58
just create a prenup in a way that actually incentivizes
37:03
better behaviors as it currently stands with no fault divorce
37:05
laws. So you're saying, OK, people
37:08
come together and everything becomes 1.
37:11
You can have a situation where, OK, that happens four years
37:16
later, five years later, someone's like, OK, I'm bored,
37:19
peace, I'm gone. That's totally legal to do.
37:22
And then it's a oh, and I'm taking half your stuff with me.
37:24
That should not be incentivized That, that, that, that like the
37:28
fact that that's even possible is that should not be possible.
37:32
That that's, that's my point. It's like that should not even
37:34
be possible. So I totally agree with you of
37:37
how marriage should be approached and what the covenant
37:39
should mean and so on. I'm just saying we live in a
37:42
very, very deeply fallen world in society where that is not the
37:45
case. So one of the reasons why I'm in
37:47
favor of normalizing prenuptial agreements is because I think it
37:51
will actually encourage. It will actually encourage more
37:57
marriage because until some of this legal framework and some of
38:00
these giant gaping holes are patched up, which are providing
38:03
perverse incentives for people to break up their marriages and
38:05
break up their families because they can be rewarded for it
38:07
financially, that shouldn't. I'm just saying that that that
38:10
shouldn't. You can, you can close those
38:13
gaps. You can close those gaps
38:14
yourself and you can do that as a couple rather than, you know,
38:19
long term. Again, hopefully everything
38:21
works, but it goes through this whole mess and now there's all
38:25
this animosity and resentment and there's fighting and it's
38:28
super expensive and it's crazy and it's horrible for everyone.
38:31
It's just like, why not just state upfront what it is and,
38:35
and make sure that both all parties are incentivized to do
38:39
this? It also provides Peace of Mind.
38:40
Let's let's, let's take the extreme example.
38:42
Let's take an Elon Musk, someone with his level of what any, any
38:47
woman he marries in his the back of his mind, there's always
38:52
going to be a concern of is she with me for me?
38:57
Or is it because I'm Elon and I've got, you know, 300, I'm
39:00
worth $300 billion and I own all these companies.
39:03
I have all these assets, whatever it is.
39:05
I think it also just provides the Peace of Mind for that
39:07
person because it's like people say, OK, you shouldn't have a
39:11
prenuptial agreement because it means that you think divorce is
39:14
even an option. And it's like, well, it cuts
39:17
both ways because if divorce is not even an option, what's the
39:19
opposition to having it? What's the opposition to just
39:22
agreeing something and saying, OK, look, we are absolutely in
39:25
this. We are absolutely in this
39:27
together, whatever. I know that both of our, we're
39:31
both well mean to me. It's additional trust.
39:34
It's, it's the opposite of mistrust.
39:35
It's actually additional trust where you can sit there and say,
39:37
OK, cool. Like we love each other.
39:39
We're going to do this. This is not about, you know,
39:42
imagine Elon, you know, it's not about my money, my assets, what
39:45
you could potentially get from me, whatever.
39:47
We're just doing this thing. We want to raise this family.
39:48
We want to stay together. So I think it can be done in a
39:51
way that it, it incentivizes the good behavior rather than
39:55
incentivizes bad behavior. I It's a real problem having
39:59
these perverse incentives where it's like you can break your vow
40:02
and be rewarded for it. Yeah.
40:03
I mean, I think practically speaking, I would be interested
40:06
if there's data about like people who getting who are
40:08
getting prenups. He's like very carefully crafted
40:10
individualized prenups that you're recommending.
40:13
And are they more likely to have these successful marriages?
40:16
I mean, I, I don't know that there's.
40:17
Data that shows, I doubt that I don't know that there.
40:20
It would probably be quite hard to get data on, and it would be
40:23
hard to do because it's a multivariate, so you'd also need
40:28
to somehow like filter out religiosity and filter out like
40:32
all the other variables you. See what that's the problem I
40:34
have with the prescription you're you're, you're giving,
40:37
you know, and that that tweet and that was my problem with the
40:39
tweet. It's it's one thing to have a
40:41
very exceptional case of someone like an Elon Musk with multiple.
40:45
I don't. Think it needs to be that that
40:47
exceptional at all. Well, well, or someone who's
40:48
like a widower with adult children and, you know, he want,
40:52
I mean, you could kind of craft up these very, you know, unique,
40:55
unique cases. And we could, we could, yeah, we
40:58
could talk. Talk.
40:59
Yeah. If they're children and, you
41:00
know, the justice that's owed to those children versus, you know,
41:03
children you may have with your new marriage and like, whatever,
41:06
right. But I think that that, you know,
41:08
the challenge I have is this prescription of if you are
41:10
wealthy, you need a prenup. And I think because you might
41:14
have some woman that you marry who's not as wealthy who wants
41:17
your money in the future. And I think that's or.
41:21
Yeah, you're. You're a wealthy woman.
41:23
I guess you could say the same. And I think that's where I, I
41:26
think they're, we're sending the wrong message and it's the wrong
41:30
principle to, upon which to enter marriage.
41:32
Now. Now, just to be clear, there are
41:35
existing, I understand in our, you know, legal system,
41:39
different ways to protect assets, different ways that
41:42
family who pass on wealth protect assets, you know, that
41:46
are affected or not affected by marriage or divorce.
41:48
So, you know, again, we don't have that family law attorney
41:50
here, do you? Have a problem with those?
41:53
Well, not necessarily. I mean, I would want to look at
41:56
the individual ones, but I haven't seen something.
41:58
I'm like, oh, that seems unjust. What does seem unjust is someone
42:01
who goes into a marriage saying I've got to protect this money
42:05
from my spouse. Because when you go into a
42:09
marriage, I believe you mean it's a.
42:11
Moral You think it's you think it's a moral issue.
42:13
I, I mean, I think it's an issue of the nature of what is the
42:16
nature, what should be the nature of marriage?
42:18
Is it a true marriage where you're going in with full
42:22
commitment if? OK.
42:24
And without can I, can I give a hypothetical, and it might sound
42:26
a little crazy if if it were the case that somehow, you know, by
42:32
magic, if the marriage was just like, OK, in the event, in the
42:36
event of a divorce, you know, both people get or both or one
42:43
person gets sick and dies. So they're they have divorced.
42:48
No, no. Let's say, let's say that
42:50
theoretically in the marriage laws it was that if if a if a
42:55
divorce takes place, then one person I don't know gets one
42:58
person gets imprisoned for life. OK.
43:00
So you're saying it's like this special penalty that the law
43:02
has? Yeah, let's, let's say, let's
43:04
say, let's say the consequence of divorce was imprisonment.
43:06
OK for the person who did this. Divorce, let's say for, let's
43:09
say for both. OK, let's say for both.
43:11
Let's let's just take an extreme 'cause I'm just trying to
43:12
understand something. And let's say you could create
43:17
an agreement that says, OK, I think that that's a bit extreme
43:22
and unfair. We can.
43:24
We can. Undo that we.
43:25
Can we can we can have it we can make an agreement which undoes
43:29
the thing that says in the event of a divorce we we both end up
43:32
in prison for. Would I be OK with that as
43:34
you're asking? Yes.
43:36
Of course, and and and because what we're because.
43:38
The consequences are. Well, because it would be unjust
43:41
to have a law that says if you. OK, so if you think.
43:43
But, but let me just explain. Just explain so that you know,
43:46
we're using this term prenup and throwing it around.
43:49
A lot of it depends on what is the purpose of the prenup and
43:51
what does the prenup says. Agreed.
43:53
Back to your tweet and what I understand your position to be,
43:56
the purpose of it and the sort of spirit behind it is I have
43:58
wealth. It's not fair that this woman
44:01
I'm going to marry gets a significant portion of my mouth
44:04
that I accrued before her. Therefore, I'm going to protect
44:06
it from her in case things go. OK, this is not my, this is not
44:09
my position. So then I misunderstand you, so
44:10
help me understand your your. Position So, so I think the
44:13
primary benefits of a prenuptial agreement, like I said, I think
44:16
#1 is actually to prevent potential arguments not just
44:20
within a couple, but also amongst family members of in
44:26
laws, all that type of stuff. Also, as I've said, if you have
44:30
potential inheritances, if you have a business, if you have
44:34
business partners and so on, there's many places where
44:36
they're like, OK, you can get married, but there's got to be
44:39
some type of prenuptial agreement because there's all
44:40
the, you're plugged into all of these other things.
44:43
We've already talked about people potentially already
44:46
already having children. I think people insure, people
44:50
insure everything else. People insure health, people
44:53
insure their cars, people ensure all these things that are far
44:55
less important than their marriages.
44:59
So it's additional Peace of Mind as I've said, I think it also.
45:02
So you're saying it's insure? So you're saying I just, I
45:05
misunderstand you 'cause it's not about protecting your
45:08
wealth, it's about insurance. So I.
45:09
Don't. I don't like, I don't like the
45:11
concept of life insurance. It doesn't make me feel good.
45:15
I don't like to think of the idea of, Oh my gosh, like if I,
45:18
if I die, or I mean capacity, like I'm planning kind of
45:20
planning for my death like. There's no moral issue with it,
45:23
right? Like.
45:23
No, I don't have a moral issue with it.
45:25
I'm just saying because a lot of people with their, with their,
45:27
their pushback against prenuptial agreement, it's, it's
45:29
largely an emotional reaction. It's, it's a, it's an emotional
45:33
like I. Don't think for me, I think.
45:35
Maybe not, maybe not in your. Case what I think in my case it
45:37
is again like going back to the tweet and what I understood your
45:39
position to be. But again, I'm trying to maybe
45:41
I, maybe I misunderstand it, which is that if you are a man
45:44
of means or a woman of means and you are entering a union, you
45:48
should ensure that you can protect those means in case
45:50
something goes wrong in the union.
45:52
And I think that general approach to marriage is not a
45:54
good one and not one we should be recommending that large.
45:57
That's, that's my position. And it's not because I'm, it's
46:00
not because of an emotional thing.
46:01
It's because I think that people should be entering marriage not
46:05
only with the all in spirit of full commitment, you know,
46:08
without the sort of trap door of I can get out of this later, but
46:11
also with an understanding that what you do with a marriage is
46:14
not just about satisfying each other and having fun together.
46:16
You build a family together and a family project.
46:20
All your resources you should make available to that family
46:22
project. Like that is the purpose of your
46:24
resources should be not your own personal pursuits and pleasures,
46:27
but the family project and the family project needs both
46:29
spouses to to lead it. So to sort of like siphon off
46:33
party just to finish, like just to siphon off part of your
46:35
resources from the other spouse to say, yeah, I'm doing this
46:38
family project with you, but I'm not going all in with my
46:40
resources because I want to protect them from you in case
46:44
something goes. SI think that's the wrong
46:45
posture for the not just for her sake of the wife, but for the
46:50
kids. And if God forbid there is some
46:52
sort of separation in the future by choice of one or the other or
46:55
both, the work that you did together in that family project
46:59
I think needs to be honored. And I think assets generally
47:03
speaking, maybe not all. Again, this is where even family
47:05
law recognizes that not all assets are on the chopping block
47:08
necessarily. Well like intelligences and
47:12
things like that. You know, again, we'll have the
47:13
family law attorney on, but you know, again, back to that, the
47:16
reason we have this a lot of the 5050 going on, my understanding
47:20
in law is because when you do the family project thing, you
47:23
know, typically speaking, you, you, you build these rhythms in
47:28
your household and your parenting where it's not equal
47:31
economically. You know, like, someone might be
47:33
getting the paycheck, but the other person's contributing in a
47:35
way that's not the paycheck. And these things should not be
47:39
so black and white in terms of, OK, well, I had this money, so I
47:43
get to keep it. Afterwards.
47:44
So why not decide for yourself? Why leave it up to the state?
47:47
Well, I think if the state again, is unjust in how they're
47:50
doing things at large and but that well, and that's the thing.
47:52
But that's where I haven't, I guess.
47:54
And that's where we haven't landed the plane.
47:55
So we're gonna have to do Part 2 'cause I, I know you gotta get
47:57
going in a minute, but that's where it's like can.
47:59
I can I ask one question. Do you think that with the way
48:01
that the cause 'cause you're, you're, you're even questioning
48:04
about whether or not you think it's just surely I mean you,
48:06
you're aware that. What law is so unjust today that
48:09
you need a prenup as a millionaire in the United and
48:12
this is in the United States or in the UK alimony so so the
48:16
fact. That you Why why should a man
48:17
who let OK, let's let's give a scenario, let's say.
48:20
All alimony laws, you would say, are unjust.
48:22
All alimony. I think it should be I think it
48:25
should be up to the people. I don't think that you.
48:27
I don't think that a man who's been divorced by a woman should
48:31
be paying her 5 grand 10 grand a What if he.
48:34
Divorces. Her for the rest of her life
48:36
because while she's even gone into a relationship with another
48:41
man just to pay for her existence.
48:43
Like there's nothing just about that.
48:45
What if he has divorced her? I think that you make your own,
48:50
yeah. I think the couple should decide
48:52
what is fair and just. Because my understanding between
48:55
my understanding behind alimony and again, I'm learning here.
48:59
So you know, it's it's a. Process like it's an old
49:01
concept. Yeah, but it's an old concept
49:03
from women. Can work.
49:05
But it's also not just when women didn't work, it's also the
49:07
idea that when you create that family project together or that
49:11
again, the, the, you know, the sort of reality of a household
49:15
together, that typically speaking, there's economic value
49:19
that the woman is bringing, whether through child rearing,
49:22
bearing or just household management that you can't
49:24
necessarily put. A dollar amount on the payments
49:29
continue. You're not even a family
49:31
anymore. Because theoretically, I guess
49:33
in the case of a lot of the elements.
49:34
In this case, you're saying, OK, premarital assets are on the
49:36
table. Assets gathered within them
49:39
within are on the table. Let's get real.
49:41
Like if we're really going to get in the weeds on it, like
49:43
think about it this way. If you took yourself out of the
49:45
workforce, you stopped your podcast, you stopped your
49:47
consulting, you stopped your travelling, you stopped
49:49
everything, stopped your social media or you put on super slow
49:52
burn, right? And you're just literally
49:54
bearing babies for five years or you're like, you know, putting
49:57
together a new house and managing house household
49:59
systems. And you're really devoting
50:00
yourself to that, right. And your income, of course, is
50:03
going to take a nosedive, let's say.
50:04
And you know, then five years later you marry someone.
50:09
They're they're bringing in a lot of the income.
50:11
Then five years later it's it's on the Bronx.
50:13
Let's just say for whatever reason, it's ended.
50:15
Maybe you didn't even choose it. Maybe you did whatever and it's
50:19
over. I think the alimony argument is
50:22
you just invested yourself, your talents, your heart into this
50:26
relationship, into this family's structure, right?
50:30
And the other person's just, they're, they're just, they're
50:32
still getting that paycheck. You know, their, their career
50:34
has actually gone up. You know, they're doing really
50:37
well. And so in the family court
50:39
system, my understanding is, OK, well, that person should get
50:41
something of that because they help make that happen.
50:44
For all the future after the relationship, that's insane.
50:46
To some, to some degree, a certain, And that's what's
50:48
debated in the Family Court. Like how much should they get?
50:50
Da da, da da how? Wealthy is the guy, you know?
50:52
Exactly. I know we're struggling on time,
50:54
so let let me let me let me land the plane, which is that I'm
50:59
we're both pro marriage and we would both like for more people
51:02
to get married. And to stay married.
51:04
And to stay married. My point?
51:06
Is that I think that that by normalizing prenuptial
51:13
agreements that will aid that aim because no man of a lot a
51:21
lot you can take it out of a man or woman some someone of means
51:25
or who's on that trajectory who is hearing wait so there's no
51:29
fault divorce laws. I can do literally nothing wrong
51:31
and this person is entitled to premarital assets during marital
51:34
assets and then also a portion of my future income potentially
51:38
indefinitely just because we got married at some point and then
51:42
they. Themselves other reasons to it
51:44
as I was kind of walking through.
51:46
It's not like it's not, it's, I think you're making it sound a
51:48
lot more arbitrary than I think there's a lot of, you know,
51:51
historosity like even in British common law and there's a lot of
51:54
history in. The United States, but the
51:57
divorce rate used to be under 1%.
51:59
But yeah, but we still live in the times of like, human nature
52:02
of men and women and how family systems are built and how.
52:07
Human nature is the exact problem.
52:08
That's why we need prenuptial agreements.
52:10
Listen, I I hear you. I think my, my last, my last
52:13
word on it is I think more prenups are actually going to
52:16
lead to less trust and more brokenness in marriages.
52:19
And not necessarily more marriages either, because it's,
52:22
again, the posture of marriage is something to protect yourself
52:26
from. And so you've got to do this
52:28
complicated legal work. The red pill conclusion.
52:30
I'm trying to. I'm trying to.
52:31
But maybe we need to do a Part 2.
52:33
And I think it would be cool to have a, a divorce attorney on
52:35
too, to talk about, you know, the insurance and outs of this.
52:37
But I appreciate you flushing it out.
52:39
More I wish we had. After our next little
52:41
conversation. And where can people find your
52:43
stuff, Zubi? Sure.
52:44
I'm on all social media at Zubi Music, ZUBY Music, and my
52:48
podcast Real Talk with Zubi is on all the usual platforms.
52:52
Awesome. Thanks.
52:52
Thanks for coming on and safe driving in this rain.
52:55
Thank you so much. Crazy rain out there, All right.
52:59
As Zubi was leaving the studio, we were having continuing this
53:02
conversation and prenups. There's obviously a lot more
53:04
that we could talk about and maybe we'll do a Part 2.
53:08
We were joking that we should do a Part 2 and get my husband
53:10
there, a divorce attorney, Zubi's girlfriend, have a whole
53:14
family affair conversation on it.
53:15
But no, I appreciated getting to get candid with Zubi and him
53:19
sharing openly about his thoughts on it.
53:21
And I think the heart of my art, my position, which I shared
53:24
already in the conversation with Zubi, is that when entering a
53:27
marriage, I think it's important to go in with that all in heart
53:30
and spirit. And the idea of designing these
53:34
careful prenups for every arrangement in order to protect
53:37
from these unjust laws, I think it's already fraught territory.
53:41
And the biggest question I would have too, is what are these laws
53:44
that are so unjust in the existing, especially in the
53:46
American, you know, culture in our country that need to be
53:50
resolved. If they do need to fix be fixed,
53:52
let's focus on fixing those instead of encouraging every
53:55
young couple to go about with this arduous process of divvying
53:59
up the assets before they even become one.
54:02
So anyways, at the end of the day, lots of good conversation
54:06
to be had around this. Thanks you.
54:07
Thank you guys for listening, interested in your thoughts and
54:10
if you have someone that you think would be a good family law
54:13
attorney who comes into it with the mentality of marriage is a
54:17
good thing for society that should be protected and
54:21
sacrificed for and that we should design our laws around
54:26
protecting marriage as best we can.
54:28
I'd love to have that conversation.
54:30
So if you have ideas, let me know.
54:32
As always, don't forget to subscribe to the podcast if you
54:35
aren't already. If you're on YouTube and you're
54:37
not subscribed yet, please click that subscribe button as well as
54:41
the notification bell so you never miss an episode of the
54:44
podcast. And if you're listening to this
54:46
podcast apps like Spotify or Apple, don't forget to give us
54:51
five stars and leave a review that will help the podcast reach
54:54
more people. Also, we have our locals
54:56
community and we're growing. I think we're getting hundreds
54:59
more every few weeks that are joining that community.
55:01
It's going to be where we're going to be posting special
55:03
updates about the show, behind the scene access about the
55:06
podcast. And we'd love for you to become
55:08
a paying monthly member so that you can help support the show.
55:12
Check that out at the link in the bio.
55:14
Thanks so much guys, and I'll see you next time.