Let me give you a MALE perspective on this for a bit. PART of what you say is right, in that courts are stacked against a man, nowdays. And yes a bitter, vindictive, femilezi-type woman will often use this to her advantage and "clean the man's clock" as it was.
However a movement is SUPPOSEDLY on today, to change this "no fault" divorce culture, and make harder to "cut and run" to to speak. So, in the future, maybe the courts will not be so one-sided.
BUT-- there is another side to this story. You say "a man would be a fool to get married in America, nowdays". What about the cases (and I know of several, myself), where the MAN runs off, and leaves the women with several children which HE fathered, to support, with NO help from him? Or, what about the wife who has to support the family, because her husband is so hooked on drugs, that he cannot KEEP a job(he can GET any job he wants through his mastery of Bull$hit, but cannot KEEP one longer than a few months), still this wife stays with her husband.
Or, what about the situation, where the husband makes 100k+, a year, has a vacation home, several vehicles, boats, ATV's, houses, etc.BUT his wife is MADE to work TWO jobs, to "pay for her bills", such as her vehicle, insurance and "lady needs". THAT to me is an ATROCITY, when a couple marries all of the :normal " bills should be one one common acount, IMHO, and a wife should NOT be made to work two jobs to pay for "her" things, in a marriage.And before you ask, NO, she is not a "shopaholic", who forced her husband to do this, after running up a huge credit-card bill. No, this woman is modest, and does NOT run to bloomingdales, saks, or ANY of those places, to "spend her hubby's money". HE is just a tightwad, stingy type. BTW-- these are NOT some people I read abou, or heard about on Jerry Springer-- these are people I went to school with, who are now adults.
Not ALL women strive to "hook 'em, nook 'em and crook 'em, as you state. SOME do, of course. BUT some MEN marry a wealthy women, to use her financially, also.
Lest you think I am some metrosexual, liberal type, I am NOT, and have had MORE than my share of "bad dealings" with women. Most women find me undesirable, because I am not very much into sports, or fashion, or hollywood, but am more into politics, science, technology and world affairs. I am also NOT a drinker, druggie, I do not smoke, and I want a woman as a friend and companion, NOT as a "bed partner, for the weekend". This attitude(not wanting a quick "fling"); does NOT seem to be very popular nowdays. One thing: you are married, and claim to be satisfied, so what makes YOU so bitter? I doubt you have put up with some of the things from women that I ,or some of the other single men here , have. You have a LOT to be thankful for, and do not even realize it.
I am SURE that god will send Lawgirl a good, decent, morally-centered man, to be a partner to, in good time, if that is what she desires, as long as she is faithful, and does NOT just "settle for the next opportunity that comes her way" Somehow, I don't think she will. She seems to have a good head on her shoulders, and of good moral character. For you to basically tell her, she is destined to lead a life alone, due to her profession, is cruel, to say the least!!!!
Does not change it one whit. Just as there are women who do not fit the strip'em mentality, there are men who are rotters.That does not change the equation. A man in America is a fool to marry an American woman.And the courts do not "lean" toward the woman. There is no further room in that direction to lean. Yes, indeed, many men are rotters and because of the system , that is more and more rational. Government is Father in that government has taken on the responsibility for women and children. Most young folks I know that do contemplate marriage wait until at least after the birth of their first child because Government pays for that child's birth expenses if the mother is not married. After the happy event often the husband sees that there are further advantages to official singularity. Fatherhood can be less expensive because the government will continue to pick up some medical tabs. By not getting around to getting married that particular emotional tie is not made and a split is easier (most times) on the man and is much easier to contemplate because, after all, one is not actually married. One has not actually made that much of a commitment. "Messing around" comes easier and has the excuse that "after all, we're not married," and it is easier to react to it by leaving.
If the couple does not marry, assets are more likely to be in the man's name only and marginally easire to protect from the woman's grasp when she goes to strip him.
I am not against marriage. Without it this culture and civilization is pretty much doomed to eventually follow the European path to extinction.