Replies

About fifteen years ago, I read a very moving article in Vogue magazine. The writer was a woman of about 40 who was recently divorced. She said that despite having gone through a bitter divorce, she hoped to marry again someday and, if she did, she would not have a prenuptial agreement. She explained, "Nothing is as romantic as a risk." She is right. It makes me very sad to realize that many people have become so hyper-practical that they devise legal ways to protect their money from the people they are (ostensibly) about to pledge their lives to. As I wrote in a previous post, if you have a prenup, you're not really married.

I agree.

I don't think I could sign a prenup on this principle:

Marriage, to me, is about love and companionship. It's about wanting to grow old with someone, and sharing everything good bad or indifferent.

It's also about taking a chance. There ain't a damn thing practical, logical or rational about love; to introduce a prenup is just flawed logic in my humble opinion.

That said - I am a young woman with ambition and drive, and I pay my own way when it comes to myself and the things I want/need. I also have a very chivalrous boyfriend, and I rather like it when he opens the door for me and gives me his sweater when I'm cold (in other words, I'm not an ultra-liberated feminist). If we decide to take our relationship to the highest level, well I still intend to be me... financially independent so that I can still go out and do the things I like to. But more than that, I would like to contribute to the costs of living.

If something were to happen, and we parted ways... well I would just leave. I wouldn't want his money or his things, I would just like to move on.

I know... in this day and age, prenups are the product of gold digging women who married money just for the divorce settlement, but that ain't me.