What a ripoff! If she gets half of his assets, does she get half of all the points he scored in the NBA? What about three of his six championship rings?

I don't want to generalize, but the position that women take on divorce settlements is so hypocritical. They argue that they were an integral part of their husband's success and demand half of everything and, increasingly, a share of their ex's future earnings after divorce. If courts accept this argument, then they should consider it under all scenarios.

It's great if your husband was big CEO or rich athelete, but what if he was a corrupt CEO or white-collar crook who looted his company? What then? If women want to argue that they are essential to their husband's success, aren't they responsible for their failures?