Well a quick search says she was born in 1988, and Adams was born in 1957. They were married in 2019, so she would have been 31 and he would have been 62. So yes, easily within the age of a daughter.
And almost nobody noticed. I used to read Dilbert, I bought his books and loved them. But the racism was always there, in Asok jokes and even in the Elbonians.
Most of the tech communities I participate in mentioned his death. Dilbert's cultural relevance ended a few decades ago, but it was a pretty big deal during the .com boom.
As a man, I have heard people (men and women) talk about "pretty" people and how they want to date them. I have seen many people date many people.
But weirdly, while i have seen people call other people thot, I haven't heard anyone call their gf an insta thot. Strange... it is almost as if it is jealousy.
I mean, if she finds it less degrading and more reliable than selling her body in other ways (stacking boxes in a warehouse or occupying a desk chair for 4400 hours), yeah.
Prenup = Prenuptual agreement, which is a contract two people sign before they get married, usually to determine who will get what in the event of a divorce. It's usually used to avoid lengthy and costly divorce proceedings.
Pension = An older type of retirement account
So, that ho on Instagram stayed married to him for two years, fulfilling the terms of their prenuptial agreement, entitling her to full divorce benefits, which will be about half of this guy's fortune, which should be enough for her to retire on.
Prenups can have whatever in them. Common is for the poorer person to get nothing or a limited part of the other person's wealth. Idea is to avoid giving away 50% of your shit if you're rich. But there's no set rules about what the terms can be.
I'm assuming Dilbert guy just wanted to have at least 2 years worth of sex if he was gonna give her a bunch of money in a divorce.
He had already invested alots in this girlfriend and did not want to have to begin again with a new girlfriend. Opportunity cost is a serious thing. Is it more work (and alots I guess) to solve/bury the problem or to get a new partner and invest time and energy in them to get the same level of closeness?
Aren't there websites for rich dudes looking for women? I seem to remember reading about that. Why not just post on there that he's the Dilbert guy and whatever his stipulations are. Someone would probably bite. He didn't seem lile that gross of a dude other than his politics. I'd certainly be willing to over look some shit if a rich lady was willing to house me and pay for my all my shit. Unfortunately I'm not that attractive.
Tbf if there's a 2 year "pension pre-nup", I don't think there was any closeness there. I'm fairly sure that whole thing was transactional from the get-go. Though I could be wrong of course.
Here's the explanation from someone who doesn't know either : an insta thot is a girl who lives on the instagrams, and is hot. The T is silent.
A 2y prenup pension is a roof over your head for 2 years before you start doing either pullups, or pushups (your choice).
I mean it’s just a thing two people agree to and sign before they get married. You could have your lawyer put anything in a prenup, it’s just most people only give a fuck about the money and assets.
You can't use a contract to make something illegal, legal. But in all but name you kind of can make it legal. You have to have sex with me everyday, after 2 years you get a fifth of my stuff.
Also it's almost impossible to get courts to actually enforce the sexual part of a contract. They just won't get involved in that stuff for the most part.
That is true. To be fair, Lemmy had its times where apparent "experts" deduced insane claims from quick glances of images. But it shows that judging the book by its cover is a real thing, and it applies to anything.
Actually a good sport to only require a two-year prenup. Rush Limbaugh made his "wives" sign ten-year prenups and being married to Limbaugh has to be worse than being married to the Dilbert dude.
The trick is to encourage him to spend his time with his friends doing whatever they do. If he's getting laid, visiting strippers, etc. that's great, at least he's not bothering you. He's going to get tired of banging you anyway. Then when the pre-nup vests, you take the money and run.
Imagine how insufferable Dilbert dude actually is (was! forgot about this delightful fact). You ask him to pass the salt, he goes into this long tirade in this mocking voice, about how he's the only capable person in the room and all the stupid femoids are too woke to even get their own salt, and if you roll your eyes he will get angry and throw a tantrum.
Pretty sure the (arguably) oldest profession of humanity is pretty much all out of fucks to give for peoples opinions of it.
but hey, some basic-ass bad-faith drive-by statements might just be the thing we need to turn this all around, keep it up, i expect the tide to turn any day now.
There are also a lot of trans exclusionary people that call themselves feminists. Telling women hat they can and can't do with their body is inherently anti-feminist.
I found that having no-true-scotsman discussions generally doesn't lead anywhere. These kinds of "feminists" suck, but they're still distinct from regular misogynists.
Sex work is work. As long as a person enters into that work wilfully and can legally consent to it, it’s functionally no different than a labourer selling their body in labour constructing a building, painting a house, or digging a trench. Denigrating sex workers serves no purpose beyond needlessly moralising the choices of consenting adults.
She entered into the agreement of her own volition (as far as we know) and was of an age to do so.
If her intention was to provide sex (and companionship, because that's sometimes an important component) in exchange for the payday after the 2 years then I'd classify that as sex work, though a more long term contracting kind of work.
If she was in it for the relationship and it just didn't work out then no, it's just a failed relationship with a bonus payout.
But i'll concede that my perspective isn't necessarily the norm, as i put quite a bit of emphasis on intent.
To me it's weird to classify sex work as something different to any other job from a labour perspective.
I understand there are unique challenges, but i think a lot of that could be solved with decent regulation and support.
The fact that there's a whole bunch of legal (and cultural) moralising around it is a big part of the problem, though not all of it.
All of that said, this isn't even close to my area of expertise so I'll assume there's a whole bunch of things I've not taken in to consideration.
84 Comments
pelespirit@sh.itjust.works · 191 pts · 242d
She probably earned every penny.
surewhynotlem@lemmy.world · 129 pts · 242d
I'm honestly surprised. This is the sort of horrible job that immigrants are usually stuck doing.
pelespirit@sh.itjust.works · 47 pts · 242d
She looks like she could be his daughter. I couldn't find anything on her age, does anyone know?
Sludgehammer@lemmy.world · 100 pts · 242d
Well a quick search says she was born in 1988, and Adams was born in 1957. They were married in 2019, so she would have been 31 and he would have been 62. So yes, easily within the age of a daughter.
pelespirit@sh.itjust.works · 41 pts · 242d
I thought she was much younger from a pic I saw. At least he was in the legal age range.
Edit: This is the pic I was referring to. Kind of shitty to show him in the 90's with it, lol.
ilinamorato@lemmy.world · 39 pts · 242d
I was 32 when my daughter was born. This makes me feel more than a little bit queasy.
deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz · 16 pts · 242d
Rightly so.
red_bull_of_juarez@lemmy.dbzer0.com · -1 pts · 241d
Life goals, my friend.
HeyJoe@lemmy.world · 15 pts · 242d
My parents were 1959 and I am early 80s so absolutely daughter age.
baggachipz@sh.itjust.works · 7 pts · 241d
He forgot the “plus seven” part of “half your age plus seven”.
ChicoSuave@lemmy.world · 43 pts · 242d
She had to endure 2 years of him and him telling her how she can use her mouth. She's underpaid.
SaharaMaleikuhm@feddit.org · 25 pts · 242d
I applaud anyone taking money from a fascist.
Akasazh@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 242d
However I despise anyone fucking a fascist
m4xie@lemmy.ca · 5 pts · 241d
Except IBM, Hugo Boss, etc.
MousePotatoDoesStuff@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 241d
I believe they mean seizing the money, not exchanging it for equivalent value.
jve@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 242d
I know what you’re trying to say here, but this is all of the US government, ICE, etc.
Saapas@piefed.zip · 1 pts · 241d
Might've been a fair exchange for products and services
ryannathans@aussie.zone · 64 pts · 242d
He died this week didn't he?
NullPointerException@lemmy.ca · 98 pts · 242d
And almost nobody noticed. I used to read Dilbert, I bought his books and loved them. But the racism was always there, in Asok jokes and even in the Elbonians.
sbv@sh.itjust.works · 49 pts · 242d
Most of the tech communities I participate in mentioned his death. Dilbert's cultural relevance ended a few decades ago, but it was a pretty big deal during the .com boom.
antonim@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 23 pts · 242d
The official White House Twitter account posted about his death, it was pretty noticeable. 😬
kungen@feddit.nu · 8 pts · 242d
So the guy on the right is dead, is it foreshadowing for those other two guys in the pic?
SaharaMaleikuhm@feddit.org · 5 pts · 242d
🤞
harrys_balzac@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 2 pts · 240d
They even used an AI-generated cartoon panel.
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today · 11 pts · 242d
he became more outwardly right wing at the time trump came around
boaratio@lemmy.world · 34 pts · 242d
Rest in piss.
cv_octavio@piefed.ca · 14 pts · 242d
Skullgrid@lemmy.world · 13 pts · 242d
And nothing of value was lost
sdfric88@lemmy.sdf.org · 2 pts · 242d
Yep
Fleur_@aussie.zone · 51 pts · 242d
Well, he at the very least, probably didn't refer to her as an "insta thot"
rumschlumpel@feddit.org · 5 pts · 241d
We don't know that. He could totaly have talked to an acquaintance and referred to her as an "insta thot".
Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de · -10 pts · 242d
As a man, I have heard people (men and women) talk about "pretty" people and how they want to date them. I have seen many people date many people.
But weirdly, while i have seen people call other people thot, I haven't heard anyone call their gf an insta thot. Strange... it is almost as if it is jealousy.
boonhet@sopuli.xyz · 0 pts · 242d
It'd have to be insta thoh because thot stands for that hoe over there
tomiant@piefed.social · -20 pts · 242d
No you don't see, this is about female empowerment! Woo, go girl, get that money selling your body!
Bgugi@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 241d
I mean, if she finds it less degrading and more reliable than selling her body in other ways (stacking boxes in a warehouse or occupying a desk chair for 4400 hours), yeah.
GreenBeanMachine@lemmy.world · 46 pts · 242d
OshagHennessey@lemmy.world · 69 pts · 241d
Insta = Instagram
THOT = That Ho Over There
Prenup = Prenuptual agreement, which is a contract two people sign before they get married, usually to determine who will get what in the event of a divorce. It's usually used to avoid lengthy and costly divorce proceedings.
Pension = An older type of retirement account
So, that ho on Instagram stayed married to him for two years, fulfilling the terms of their prenuptial agreement, entitling her to full divorce benefits, which will be about half of this guy's fortune, which should be enough for her to retire on.
Thank you for coming to my TED talk.
RotSteinFinke@feddit.org · 41 pts · 241d
Never knew THOT is an acronym. I always just read it as a new slang word.
Rooster326@programming.dev · 7 pts · 241d
Why was the prenup 2 years? Do most prenup have a minimum time till you get all their money?
boonhet@sopuli.xyz · 26 pts · 241d
Prenups can have whatever in them. Common is for the poorer person to get nothing or a limited part of the other person's wealth. Idea is to avoid giving away 50% of your shit if you're rich. But there's no set rules about what the terms can be.
I'm assuming Dilbert guy just wanted to have at least 2 years worth of sex if he was gonna give her a bunch of money in a divorce.
Rooster326@programming.dev · 4 pts · 241d
Oh that's wild. So it's his own fault in a way.
He put a timer on his marriage.
boonhet@sopuli.xyz · 12 pts · 241d
Oh he must've known she wouldn't stay for long. It's all in him lol
Why get married then is beyond me. He's got money, could just pay for the girlfriend experience and have one high end girl on retainer for that.
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 241d
He had already invested alots in this girlfriend and did not want to have to begin again with a new girlfriend. Opportunity cost is a serious thing. Is it more work (and alots I guess) to solve/bury the problem or to get a new partner and invest time and energy in them to get the same level of closeness?
lightnsfw@reddthat.com · 3 pts · 241d
Aren't there websites for rich dudes looking for women? I seem to remember reading about that. Why not just post on there that he's the Dilbert guy and whatever his stipulations are. Someone would probably bite. He didn't seem lile that gross of a dude other than his politics. I'd certainly be willing to over look some shit if a rich lady was willing to house me and pay for my all my shit. Unfortunately I'm not that attractive.
boonhet@sopuli.xyz · 2 pts · 241d
Tbf if there's a 2 year "pension pre-nup", I don't think there was any closeness there. I'm fairly sure that whole thing was transactional from the get-go. Though I could be wrong of course.
OshagHennessey@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 241d
Seconding the guy who said you can put whatever you want in a prenup
Petter1@discuss.tchncs.de · 3 pts · 241d
Smart cookie
Hadriscus@jlai.lu · 2 pts · 241d
Thanks !
prettybunnys@piefed.social · 1 pts · 237d
Damn if she’d held out a liiiiiiittle longer she coulda had it all
TheLowestStone@lemmy.world · 13 pts · 241d
An instance thot is a lady who posts lewd pictures of herself on Instagram.
A 2 year prenup meant that she had to be married to him for 2 years before getting access to the Dilbert money.
milk@discuss.tchncs.de · 15 pts · 241d
An instance thot should be the fediverse version of an insta thot
TheLowestStone@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 241d
Lol... I'm leaving it.
Hadriscus@jlai.lu · -1 pts · 241d
Here's the explanation from someone who doesn't know either : an insta thot is a girl who lives on the instagrams, and is hot. The T is silent.
A 2y prenup pension is a roof over your head for 2 years before you start doing either pullups, or pushups (your choice).
OshagHennessey@lemmy.world · 12 pts · 241d
THOT = That Ho Over There
Hadriscus@jlai.lu · 1 pts · 241d
Cheers. (I got my eye on you, J-quallin)
someguy3@lemmy.world · 36 pts · 242d
A 2 year prenup exists?
borari@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 77 pts · 242d
I mean it’s just a thing two people agree to and sign before they get married. You could have your lawyer put anything in a prenup, it’s just most people only give a fuck about the money and assets.
Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works · 33 pts · 242d
Yeah it's uncommon, but not unheard of for there to even be sexual components to a prenup.
wabasso@lemmy.ca · 3 pts · 241d
Wait really, sexual stuff? Couldn’t they use contracts to make prostitution legal then?
Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works · 5 pts · 241d
You can't use a contract to make something illegal, legal. But in all but name you kind of can make it legal. You have to have sex with me everyday, after 2 years you get a fifth of my stuff.
Also it's almost impossible to get courts to actually enforce the sexual part of a contract. They just won't get involved in that stuff for the most part.
lauracor@lemmy.world · 35 pts · 241d
Internet stories get exaggerated fast. Real people and relationships are always more complex than a single viral narrative.
Virtvirt588@lemmy.world · 14 pts · 241d
That is true. To be fair, Lemmy had its times where apparent "experts" deduced insane claims from quick glances of images. But it shows that judging the book by its cover is a real thing, and it applies to anything.
sauerkrautsaul@lemmus.org · 18 pts · 242d
dilbert fuckin sucked assholes
Saapas@piefed.zip · 18 pts · 241d
He might've been fine with railing her for two years for whatever money she got out of it. I guess that would've been a win-win
Blackmist@feddit.uk · 14 pts · 241d
Fair play to both of them tbh.
ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world · 13 pts · 241d
Actually a good sport to only require a two-year prenup. Rush Limbaugh made his "wives" sign ten-year prenups and being married to Limbaugh has to be worse than being married to the Dilbert dude.
BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today · 6 pts · 241d
The trick is to encourage him to spend his time with his friends doing whatever they do. If he's getting laid, visiting strippers, etc. that's great, at least he's not bothering you. He's going to get tired of banging you anyway. Then when the pre-nup vests, you take the money and run.
ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 241d
I think in Rush Limbaugh's case the trick is to make sure he stays dead. Dead Rush Limbaugh is the best sort of Rush Limbaugh.
Nalivai@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 241d
Imagine how insufferable Dilbert dude actually
is(was! forgot about this delightful fact). You ask him to pass the salt, he goes into this long tirade in this mocking voice, about how he's the only capable person in the room and all the stupid femoids are too woke to even get their own salt, and if you roll your eyes he will get angry and throw a tantrum.Frostbeard@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 241d
Ok ok ok. Now that the comment section has been explained "insta thot", does anyone have source!?
Simulation6@sopuli.xyz · 9 pts · 242d
Trash accumulates.
Akasazh@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 242d
Apparently the passerines are the largest bird group, but I fail to see the relevance here, somehow.
5wim@slrpnk.net · 21 pts · 242d
They were looking for a roadrunner
melsaskca@lemmy.ca · 2 pts · 241d
Ah...the things we do for love. /s
technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 241d
something something dilburnt
tomiant@piefed.social · -43 pts · 242d
Yeah let's celebrate prostitution, so empowering!
Senal@programming.dev · 41 pts · 242d
Pretty sure the (arguably) oldest profession of humanity is pretty much all out of fucks to give for peoples opinions of it.
but hey, some basic-ass bad-faith drive-by statements might just be the thing we need to turn this all around, keep it up, i expect the tide to turn any day now.
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today · 1 pts · 242d
the other commentor is likely a mysogynist and wouldnt chastise if a man did porn.
rumschlumpel@feddit.org · 4 pts · 241d
There's plenty of anti-prostitution feminists.
Duke_Nukem_1990@feddit.org · 3 pts · 241d
There are also a lot of trans exclusionary people that call themselves feminists. Telling women hat they can and can't do with their body is inherently anti-feminist.
rumschlumpel@feddit.org · 3 pts · 241d
I found that having no-true-scotsman discussions generally doesn't lead anywhere. These kinds of "feminists" suck, but they're still distinct from regular misogynists.
Instigate@aussie.zone · 39 pts · 242d
Sex work is work. As long as a person enters into that work wilfully and can legally consent to it, it’s functionally no different than a labourer selling their body in labour constructing a building, painting a house, or digging a trench. Denigrating sex workers serves no purpose beyond needlessly moralising the choices of consenting adults.
zarkanian@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 241d
I agree with you, but...does this qualify as sex work?
Senal@programming.dev · 4 pts · 241d
She entered into the agreement of her own volition (as far as we know) and was of an age to do so.
If her intention was to provide sex (and companionship, because that's sometimes an important component) in exchange for the payday after the 2 years then I'd classify that as sex work, though a more long term contracting kind of work.
If she was in it for the relationship and it just didn't work out then no, it's just a failed relationship with a bonus payout.
But i'll concede that my perspective isn't necessarily the norm, as i put quite a bit of emphasis on intent.
To me it's weird to classify sex work as something different to any other job from a labour perspective.
I understand there are unique challenges, but i think a lot of that could be solved with decent regulation and support.
The fact that there's a whole bunch of legal (and cultural) moralising around it is a big part of the problem, though not all of it.
All of that said, this isn't even close to my area of expertise so I'll assume there's a whole bunch of things I've not taken in to consideration.
barooboodoo@lemmy.zip · 3 pts · 241d
Well she's now rich and will never hear a single syllable uttered by you, so yeah that sounds pretty empowered to me.
Tetragrade@leminal.space · 3 pts · 241d