Correction: Don't get married at all, regardless of economic status. If you are rich, you can lose almost everything you've worked for. If you're poor you have a good chance of ending in a de facto debtors' prison.

> “don’t get married if you are successful and like financial security”.

But that's terrible advice really, and doesn't follow reality. So I think there is something more going on.

I don't think simple, actionable advice is that hard really, but there is a lot of political and ideological noise around the subject that confuses people.

It certainly does follow reality. You just haven't talked to the large number of financially ruined men that the family courts system has let be abused by vindictive women.

It's common. The root problem is presuppositions in the marriage contract are wrong.

The reality is most relationships don't last forever for lots of reasons and most reasons being benign.

But the penalties in the marriage contract are based on the fallacy that relationships should last forever and if they don't it's the provider's penalty and the provider's life energy should be consumed forever to pay for it.

Obviously there's some reasons it was setup that way such as providing for kids, but it's out of balanced and been abused for so long it's now a stereotype.

This is a major cause for lack of relationship formation! Because a failed relationship can demolish your future many hardworking smart men have moved the goalposts so high that we can see statistically they are less likely to have children.

Those who didn't work hard and have nothing to lose are not being punished they are instead given welfare.

Won't someone think of the children and fix this stupid law driven power imbalance that's driving us toward the future warned in the idiocracy movies.

This is just nonsense, at least in the jurisdictions I'm familiar with. Outliers exist, sure.

Which jurisdictions are these?