The Meretricious Relationship – New Way To Rob Men

Reader Response to “Don’t Marry Career Women” – The Meretricious Relationship – New Way To Rob Men

The Meretricious Relationship – New Way To Rob Men
Regular Contributor
New Feminist Term For Cohabitating, Non-Marriage Couples.

Nonmarital Relationships: Property and Debt Division (applies specifically to Washington State)

This article from the Northwest Women’s Law Center shows why cohabitation is a terrible idea. Joining the Marriage Strike is not enough to prevent a woman from plundering your assets with the assistance of the Judicial System. In states that do not recognize common law marriage, the courts have devised a creative way to separate a man from his hard-earned money. Behold, the meretricious relationship.

There are no set standards to determine if a meretricious relationship exists, nor is it limited to being between a man and woman. Basically, a meretricious relationship exists wherever the courts decide it does, and they have a whole lot of latitude in making that decision. While cohabitation is one of the factors that has been used in the past to show that a meretricious relationship exists, it’s kind of scary that cohabitation isn’t necessary for such a relationship to exist.

So what happens if the court finds that you are party to a meretricious relationship? Pumpkin gets a claim on the division of your assets. The pillage of your net worth is supposed to be “just and equitable” (which it isn’t), but it isn’t even required to be an equal split. Again, the courts have a wide degree of latitude in deciding how much of your stuff you get to keep. Divorce Court is probably a good place to look if you want to see what the courts consider “just and equitable”.

It’s bad enough that men are being terrorized by draconian sexual harassment laws in the workplace, now we face the threat of meretricious relationships and judicial activism in our private lives. It took thirty or forty years for men to spread the word about the kangaroo divorce courts. I hope it doesn’t take that long to recognize the threat posed by meretricious relationships. As the Marriage Strike continues to spread, I think we’ll be hearing a lot more about meretricious relationships in the future.


Washington Cohabitation FAQ’s
By Law Offices of Raj Bains, P.S.C.

Published: July 17, 2004

1. My ex-girlfriend lived in my home for the past seven years. We broke up two months ago. Yesterday, I was served papers claiming that we had a meretricious relationship, whatever that is. In her lawsuit, she wants half the equity in my house. She can’t be serious, can she?
She is serious, and you should be too. Under her theory of meretricious relationship, your ex-girlfriend is seeking an equitable distribution of the assets acquired during your relationship. In other words, she wants her share of whatever was accumulated while the two of you were together.

2. But we weren’t married. What is a meretricious relationship anyway?
A meretricious relationship is a stable, marital-like relationship where both parties cohabit with knowledge that a lawful marriage between them does not exist.

3. I can agree with that. We knew we weren’t married. How does a court determine whose relationship is meretricious and whose is not?
There is no precise formula to determine if a relationship is a meretricious one. Courts will generally review the following non-exclusive list of relevant factors:

(a) continuous cohabitation;
(b) duration of the relationship;
(c) purpose of the relationship;
(d) pooling of resources and services for joint projects; and
(e) intent of the parties.

4. Say that the court looks at the factors and decides that we have a meretricious relationship. What happens next?
Once a court determines the existence of a meretricious relationship, then it will evaluate the interest each party had in the property accumulated during the relationship and make a just and equitable distribution of it.

“With women or the female mindset imparted through feminization on the vast majority of society, it will be very easy to control the Empire…I mean…the republic.” –

05-17-2007 12:22 PM

Re: The Meretricious Relationship – New Way To Rob Men

As a guy who has seen alot over the course of my life, I think the biggest mistake this country made which was in lock step with modern feminism is the abolishment of traditional marriage to “no fault” which allows the unfettered pillaging of a mans assets should his relationships or marriage fail. To make matters worse, this empowers the lesser of the assets to plunder the estates of the wealthy and they need no reason to justify it. Only the time clock that was run on the marriage or relationship no matter how outrageous the behavior. Time and again you read the stories of women who marry into wealth, pop a few kids, then at year ten or so, pull the plug and turn the guys life upside down as they take the kids, keep the house, pillage the assets to atleast 50% and require the man to pay outrageous child support payments far beyond what is reasonable. Custody awards are virtually automatic to the woman unless the guy can prove that she is an absolute deranged mom. ( That usually means she has to be hooked on serious drugs ).  In the meantime, she can move in her current back door man who she’d been fu—-g for the last couple of years why you were hard at work to support her and the kids. Get it? It’s NO FAULT DIVORCE! This is great for the lawyers as well, as they can most surely ignite a huge fight in court to further plunder and bleed the assets down. What a deal, eh? No accountability in the marriage has to be defended. Remember the occasional stories of the guy that goes biserk and one day “for no reason” committs mass murder and suicide on his family then himself? That’s the way the media reports the story. If you look allittle closer, you find that in most of these cases, the woman was about to file for divorce and use the feminized court system to castrate her husband, both emotionally and financially. If the proceedings were “equitable” and the guys could see a future for themselves, or if the injustices of the marriage were truly addressed and used to determine asset distribution, you can bet alot of this ten years and pull the plug BS would stop, as these feminist, controlling, selfish pimpesses would soon see that using a guy in this manner for self gain without respect for the man would fail and they could end up with little or nothing from their abhorent behaviors and self serving descretions.

It is no wonder many guys don’t want to risk having their hard earned assets exposed to this kind of racket. The only defense to any of it nowadays is the prenuptial agreement. This is effective in most states if done right, but I’m told the liberal courts are squirming in their seats looking for ways to justify throwing these agreements out as well, and even if you have one, family law has been crafted around the agreements with respect to having children that again, gives the court the power to tell the guy to again, pull down his pants and bend over. He will still be getting a significant stuffing of the preverbial ” equitable and just ” green hog inserted with very little lubricant.

06-16-2007 07:37 PM

Re: The Meretricious Relationship – New Way To Rob Men
Regular Contributor
Prenuptial agreements don’t work. They’re routinely thrown out by family court judges (scumbags).

Pre-nups don’t stop false sex abuse charges.

Pre-nups don’t stop imputed child support payments beyond a man’s ability to pay.

Pre-nups don’t enforce visitation.

Pre-nups don’t reduce suicides.

See the discussion here for more:


“With women or the female mindset imparted through feminization on the vast majority of society, it will be very easy to control the Empire…I mean…the republic.” –

06-20-2007 01:50 PM

Re: The Meretricious Relationship – New Way To Rob Men

BackToTheKitchen: What you are saying about child support, ect. is all true. This is one way that liberal judge scumbags get around prenups. They simply require outrageous child support payments be made so that the guy often has to begin liquidating hard earned assets to pay. And, of course, all domestic violence/ abuse laws were written (by man hating femnazis with the help of spineless male lackey politicians who deserve to be thrown out of office and jailed for derilection of office) as control mechanisms to subdue resistant men to the outrageous behavior of their femnazi wives who want total control or are going to divorce.

Another trap that judges like to use to get around prenups is any comingling of assets. They use this and reason the guy “intended” on giving half of anything shared to the ex whether that was his intent or not. Like I’ve heard many say: ” No kind act or deed in mariage goes unpunished in divorce”. Being kind or gifting anything to a spouse becomes an obligation of the guy to the spouse to pay on forever, and any asset not listed on a prenup aquired during a marriage becomes a “marital asset” regardless if the spouse pays for a dime of it to aquire or not, and is therefore subject to division of property in divorce. No wonder so many women start making demands on their husbands to spend and incurr debt early on in the marriage to aquire real property and physical assets.Like I’ve said before, this just increases all the goodies that the bitc* can take during a divorce, like an expensive house, cars, furniture, china, ect. Oh and lest I forget, if the marital debts are high at the time of divorce, even though the spouse is saddled with paying half of that, the scumbag judges frequently take that into account as well and require a stiff enough support payment to the ex, that it will cover her payments to be made, so in reality, the guy is made to pay one way or the other. It’s what it is. A total sham and fraudelent proceeding that robs a guy blind. A feminazid court system. It’s time to end the outrageous inequities.

06-21-2007 03:28 PM

Click on the board or message subject at the top to return.

%d bloggers like this: