[Sherman]

Now that it is legal for men to marry each other, that doesn't mean that only gay men can get married. When you are married, you fill out forms and pay a fee to satisfy the state requirements. But they don't ask you about your inner intentions and beliefs. That means that there is nothing to prevent heterosexual men from getting married. It's important to be precise about the terminology. It isn't gay marriage. It is same-sex marriage.

Why would you want to do this? It depends on the benefits. A marriage gives certain rights and obligations. As a heterosexual men, this would be no more of an obligation than filing a formal legal joint partnership or corporation, which men do all the time. You would form a matrix with pluses and minuses and decide whether this legal structure has any advantage. When you are ready to dissolve the legal structure, you get a divorce.

In the 1950s, to get ahead in a corporation, you had to be a married man which meant you were stable. Now, the new norm is you have to be men married to each other to get ahead in a corporation. So, why not marry another heterosexual man so you both can get ahead? You would use exactly the same criteria for finding a partner that you would use to form a legal partnership.

Anyone who is in law can tell you that working in a law firm which is a partnership is the same as living in a dysfunctional marriage. So heterosexual men have been doing this for some time.

Since this is so new, I am basically posing the question. What are the advantages? Is it something heterosexual men will start doing? Do you think the state will be as supportive of the system when they start losing revenue from things like joint marriage tax returns?

Once you accumulate sufficient wealth you have options. You can always move to Russia and marry an Orthodox Russian woman.

[Hades]

I'm sure there's going to be a lot of people taking advantage of the gay marriage laws in order to protect assets and forge alliances.

Pretty fucking hilarious though, all the critics were basically right, if same-sex "business marriages" become a thing in order to protect assets (or safeguard property under divorce laws) then gay marriage really did kill the institution. Love is love no longer.

[aSimpNamedBrokeback]

(06-28-2015 08:37 PM)Hades Wrote:  

I'm sure there's going to be a lot of people taking advantage of the gay marriage laws in order to protect assets and forge alliances.

Maybe that was the main reason behind it all along. I know I could double my retirement if a "married" a co-worker.

[h3ltrsk3ltr]

Haha, is someone trying to get out of field day?

[Dr. Howard]

this is a great idea and I will coin the term for you

"dude, lets turn this bro-mance into man-trimony"

I was going to go with bro-marriage but man-trimony has a better ring to it. Who wants to start a #whyineedmantrimony hash tag?

[Blunt]

This would be a very interesting development.

Now that they have introduced all these word salad terms for sexuality, the marriage of convenience would be even easier. Even if they somehow proved there is no romantic or sexual relationship you could just use a made up term to describe it like Dr. Howard's.

This sounds like a job for the guys on 4chan.

[rpg]

(06-28-2015 08:28 PM)Sherman Wrote:  

Now that it is legal for men to marry each other, that doesn't mean that only gay men can get married. When you are married, you fill out forms and pay a fee to satisfy the state requirements. But they don't ask you about your inner intentions and beliefs. That means that there is nothing to prevent heterosexual men from getting married. It's important to be precise about the terminology. It isn't gay marriage. It is same-sex marriage.

Why would you want to do this? It depends on the benefits. A marriage gives certain rights and obligations. As a heterosexual men, this would be no more of an obligation than filing a formal legal joint partnership or corporation, which men do all the time. You would form a matrix with pluses and minuses and decide whether this legal structure has any advantage. When you are ready to dissolve the legal structure, you get a divorce.

In the 1950s, to get ahead in a corporation, you had to be a married man which meant you were stable. Now, the new norm is you have to be men married to each other to get ahead in a corporation. So, why not marry another heterosexual man so you both can get ahead? You would use exactly the same criteria for finding a partner that you would use to form a legal partnership.

Anyone who is in law can tell you that working in a law firm which is a partnership is the same as living in a dysfunctional marriage. So heterosexual men have been doing this for some time.

Since this is so new, I am basically posing the question. What are the advantages? Is it something heterosexual men will start doing? Do you think the state will be as supportive of the system when they start losing revenue from things like joint marriage tax returns?

Once you accumulate sufficient wealth you have options. You can always move to Russia and marry an Orthodox Russian woman.

I was thinking this same thing the other day and thought it too crazy to post.
Hear me out. If I have a good pension coming my way but I am going to die of cancer before I get it, I can marry one of my friends and let him have legal access to it and life long health insurance.
This is gonna be interesting. Marriage is dead. Its money talks bullshit walks.

[Phoenix]

Not to mention marrying elder relatives to avoid death taxes.

[Bacchus]

I can see this being a big hit among organized crime. Think about it, in every crime movie, what's the weak link that always contributes to the protagonist's downfall? The woman.



Now, imagine if our mafioso was married to this guy:



Instead of carrying a liability around, the mobster has another goodfella to work with. That's double the crime, which should double the profit. And, when one of them gets pinched, there's an easy division of assets through divorce. Same deal if he gets whacked.

[zombiejimmorrison]

(06-28-2015 08:37 PM)Hades Wrote:  

Pretty fucking hilarious though, all the critics were basically right, if same-sex "business marriages" become a thing in order to protect assets (or safeguard property under divorce laws) then gay marriage really did kill the institution. Love is love no longer.

That is a truly amazing loop hole that guys can work with, damn didn't even see it

[TheWastelander]

(06-28-2015 11:54 PM)Bacchus Wrote:  

I can see this being a big hit among organized crime. Think about it, in every crime movie, what's the weak link that always contributes to the protagonist's downfall? The woman.



Now, imagine if our mafioso was married to this guy:



Instead of carrying a liability around, the mobster has another goodfella to work with. That's double the crime, which should double the profit. And, when one of them gets pinched, there's an easy division of assets through divorce. Same deal if he gets whacked.

Plus a spouse can't be compelled to testify against their significant other.

I think these guys are too proud to turn into a fake gay mafia, though.

[Tytalus]

(06-28-2015 08:28 PM)Sherman Wrote:  

Now that it is legal for men to marry each other, that doesn't mean that only gay men can get married. When you are married, you fill out forms and pay a fee to satisfy the state requirements. But they don't ask you about your inner intentions and beliefs. That means that there is nothing to prevent heterosexual men from getting married. It's important to be precise about the terminology. It isn't gay marriage. It is same-sex marriage.

Why would you want to do this? It depends on the benefits. A marriage gives certain rights and obligations. As a heterosexual men, this would be no more of an obligation than filing a formal legal joint partnership or corporation, which men do all the time. You would form a matrix with pluses and minuses and decide whether this legal structure has any advantage. When you are ready to dissolve the legal structure, you get a divorce.

In the 1950s, to get ahead in a corporation, you had to be a married man which meant you were stable. Now, the new norm is you have to be men married to each other to get ahead in a corporation. So, why not marry another heterosexual man so you both can get ahead? You would use exactly the same criteria for finding a partner that you would use to form a legal partnership.

Anyone who is in law can tell you that working in a law firm which is a partnership is the same as living in a dysfunctional marriage. So heterosexual men have been doing this for some time.

Since this is so new, I am basically posing the question. What are the advantages? Is it something heterosexual men will start doing? Do you think the state will be as supportive of the system when they start losing revenue from things like joint marriage tax returns?

Once you accumulate sufficient wealth you have options. You can always move to Russia and marry an Orthodox Russian woman.

I saw this very idea being proposed on a gun forum canadiangunnutz.com (great gun forum btw).

So in Canada, a certain class of guns is called "Prohibited." You can only inherit a prohibited license by blood... or marriage. So this guy knows an old single dude with Prohibited license, no kids, no wife, no nephews etc. This was asking forum about how to convince this old guy to "marry" him and so he could keep the guns from being destroyed by the government when the old guy died.

Mostly, the forum reacted a kind of blanked out "wtf that's homo" in a fairly polite Canadian fashion.

I think it's icky from an ethical perspective, but yes, I agree we should expect to see more of this happening in the future.

[tomtud]

Maybe I missed this ,,, what is stopping someone from marrying some old dude who is going to die soon just to collect his pension benefits forever. I know in hetero couples, when one dies the spouse receives the retirement benefits from deceseased spouse until they die.
I can see some straight dudes befriending dome old straight dudes just to pull off that scam. It would prob go down like this.... Tell the old man you will help him clean his yard. Cut the grass etc etc help him around the house ... in return when he dies you get his pension because you are his "spouse".
People are going to find a way to profit from this....

[Oswaldo Guimaraens]

Brilliant idea. In addition to certain monetary and social benefits, this arrangement could turn the SJW tables a tad and make a mockery of the whole gay marriage idea.

Another benefit could be for taxes. There is a marriage penalty if both earners have high incomes, but if one spouse has zero income, then there is a marriage benefit for joint filers due to the higher deductions I believe.

Since I have no desire to get married, I could probably be bribed into entering into a "green card" marriage with a man whom I felt would contribute to U.S. society. Or one of my poor friends who carries a Syrian or Pakistani passport and who is thus marooned in a place with little opportunity but would be a positive addition to the U.S. if only they'd let him in.

[DaveR]

Scenario 1: I earn $100k per year, but my brother is in college and has no income, so I'm supporting him. We could get married and therefore reduce our tax burden: http://www.forbes.com/sites/kellyphillip...-and-more/

Scenario 2: Five wives.

[Guitarman]

You could invent a new sexual identity to encompass this great idea.

Hetero-*cis*-hetero-homo-platonic-aromantic-asexual partnership.

No fudge-packing or up hill gardening required.

[Hedonistic Traveler]

I was thinking about this too. Don't the spouses of veterans get a ton of shit? When I always applying to schools they'd always ask me if I was military or a military spouse. Could be a good game.

[Dr. Howard]

(06-29-2015 03:19 AM)tomtud Wrote:  

Maybe I missed this ,,, what is stopping someone from marrying some old dude who is going to die soon just to collect his pension benefits forever. I know in hetero couples, when one dies the spouse receives the retirement benefits from deceseased spouse until they die.
I can see some straight dudes befriending dome old straight dudes just to pull off that scam. It would prob go down like this.... Tell the old man you will help him clean his yard. Cut the grass etc etc help him around the house ... in return when he dies you get his pension because you are his "spouse".
People are going to find a way to profit from this....

Or, if you don't want to be a caretaker you can just offer someone money to marry them. I think it would be pretty cheap to buy survivor/current benefits from a down and out veteran.

I am a religious person, and I think it is god that ordains marriages, not the state so if they want to make up stupid laws I don't see a reason to exploit them.

PS, this has big implications for immigration. I have a 'same sex' client who immigrated to the US with their spouse that is US citizen and so is getting a green card through marriage. They are legitimately gay but there is nothing stopping to dudes using man-trimony to immigrate. Its an easy way to bring over your business partner.

[Gimlet]

All crime duos should immediately marry so that in the event of criminal prosecution they cannot be forced to testify against each other. Spousal Privilege will mean the end of dangling plea bargains in order to get one to pin the crime on the other.

[General Stalin]

Been done.

[Dan Woolf]

----------------------------------------

[DaveR]

(06-29-2015 06:22 AM)Hedonistic Traveler Wrote:  

I was thinking about this too. Don't the spouses of veterans get a ton of shit? When I always applying to schools they'd always ask me if I was military or a military spouse. Could be a good game.

What a great thread. Now that the legal concept of marriage is nothing more than a parody of what actual marriage has been for thousands of years, it can be seen as a legal tool to be used for maximum personal benefit. Obviously this will take time as the restrictions on incest and polygamy will first need to be challenged, but one of the dissenting judges already alluded to the possibility.

Another possibility I've just thought of: Assuming one is able to marry his father or grandfather, could marriage be used to avoid inheritance taxes?

[Menace]

Just look here: http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/m...30190.html

Whether or not you favor marriage as a social institution, there's no denying that it confers many rights, protections, and benefits -- both legal and practical. Some of these vary from state to state, but the list typically includes:

Tax Benefits
Filing joint income tax returns with the IRS and state taxing authorities.
Creating a "family partnership" under federal tax laws, which allows you to divide business income among family members.

Estate Planning Benefits
Inheriting a share of your spouse's estate.
Receiving an exemption from both estate taxes and gift taxes for all property you give or leave to your spouse.
Creating life estate trusts that are restricted to married couples, including QTIP trusts, QDOT trusts, and marital deduction trusts.
Obtaining priority if a conservator needs to be appointed for your spouse -- that is, someone to make financial and/or medical decisions on your spouse's behalf.

Government Benefits
Receiving Social Security, Medicare, and disability benefits for spouses.
Receiving veterans' and military benefits for spouses, such as those for education, medical care, or special loans.
Receiving public assistance benefits. (imagine the field day you can have with this one)

Employment Benefits
Obtaining insurance benefits through a spouse's employer.
Taking family leave to care for your spouse during an illness.
Receiving wages, workers' compensation, and retirement plan benefits for a deceased spouse.
Taking bereavement leave if your spouse or one of your spouse's close relatives dies.

Medical Benefits
Visiting your spouse in a hospital intensive care unit or during restricted visiting hours in other parts of a medical facility.
Making medical decisions for your spouse if he or she becomes incapacitated and unable to express wishes for treatment.

Death Benefits
Consenting to after-death examinations and procedures.
Making burial or other final arrangements.

Family Benefits
Filing for stepparent or joint adoption.
Applying for joint foster care rights.
Receiving equitable division of property if you divorce.
Receiving spousal or child support, child custody, and visitation if you divorce.

Housing Benefits
Living in neighborhoods zoned for "families only."
Automatically renewing leases signed by your spouse.

Consumer Benefits
Receiving family rates for health, homeowners', auto, and other types of insurance.
Receiving tuition discounts and permission to use school facilities.
Other consumer discounts and incentives offered only to married couples or families.

Other Legal Benefits and Protections
Suing a third person for wrongful death of your spouse and loss of consortium (loss of intimacy).
Suing a third person for offenses that interfere with the success of your marriage, such as alienation of affection and criminal conversation (these laws are available in only a few states).
Claiming the marital communications privilege, which means a court can't force you to disclose the contents of confidential communications between you and your spouse during your marriage.
Receiving crime victims' recovery benefits if your spouse is the victim of a crime.
Obtaining immigration and residency benefits for noncitizen spouse.
Visiting rights in jails and other places where visitors are restricted to immediate family.

[germanico]

(06-28-2015 11:54 PM)Bacchus Wrote:  

Instead of carrying a liability around, the mobster has another goodfella to work with. That's double the crime, which should double the profit. And, when one of them gets pinched, there's an easy division of assets through divorce. Same deal if he gets whacked.

Conyugal visits would eliminate the middle men in prision-gang communications.

[The Beast1]

Interesting concept. I bet this would be an excellent way to get entry into certain countries. How would the "divorce" play out?