Loan agreement for only one person: advantages / disadvantages

However, you call it the ONLY existing case, and that is indeed sexist. And by the way, a complete load of nonsense.

I believe did not mean it that way. He has just been in the forward defense of (his) life model ever since the word "prenuptial agreement" appeared, a model that is not practiced at all by the OP.

That is why I tried to make it clear that one would first have to differentiate which model underlies, before discussing whether a prenuptial agreement makes sense or not.

Moreover, contract is not equal to contract: Of course, one could also contractually secure a partner who is raising children full-time beyond the scope of the legal standard. Just a thought, because it is also about appreciating the valuable childcare work that our society hardly compensates monetarily.

That one considers a contract for the case of marriage when there is a house paid off on a sole income, in which one partner may live rent-free and where no career setbacks have yet occurred anywhere due to child-rearing, I find understandable. Why it is so heavily criticized is unclear to me, especially since the argument always is childcare work, which (still) does not even occur here.

Instead, one "defends" one’s own life model even though no one has questioned it. The mere existence of people who approve of prenuptial agreements in certain situations seems to already exceed a threshold of irritation.

No, not because you distribute the roles the way you do (that’s nobody’s business), but because you don’t just call this case the normal case, which would be bad enough but – understood empirically rather than normatively – not entirely unfounded. However, you describe it as the ONLY existing case and that is indeed sexist. And by the way, a load of nonsense.

Nope, I call the case of the prenuptial agreement abnormal, and for me it is sexist. In most, almost all cases, the man protects himself. So how does a marital quarrel then go, hmm let me guess. Man to woman: “I won’t make any compromises here, if you don’t like it, move out of my house!” Or the coffee gathering among friends: “No, the house belongs to me alone, my stupid naive wife is only allowed to run the household.” A prenuptial agreement shifts the power in favor of the man. He positions himself economically stronger and the wife makes herself dependent. Okay, there are exceptions, the childless career woman with at least 4000€ gross. She can sign such a thing. Trying not to be so sexist.

He positions himself economically stronger and the wife becomes dependent

There is no need for a marriage contract for that.

If the woman primarily takes on the upbringing of the children, this will nowadays inevitably come with losses in her professional career (at the very least a delay in the career). Or the childcare work is a life goal, and a career in paid employment is voluntarily given up for it. In any case, she is dependent.

Or would you consider the possibility of taking half of the accrued gains in case of divorce as independence? Probably not.

The dependency is not perceived as such in functioning marriages, and that is a good thing. Nevertheless, it exists.

No, I consider the case of a marriage contract abnormal, and for me it is sexist

Since a contract can be designed, the statement that it is inherently sexist is not valid.

Ok, there are exceptions, the childless career woman with at least €4000 gross

Or in a job where a right of return after absence is given. Or, or. But if even you see exceptions, then why the general rant?

You don't need a prenuptial agreement for that.

If the woman primarily takes on the upbringing of the children, in today's times that will only come with losses in her professional career (at the very least a delay in career advancement). Or the childcare work is a life goal and a career in paid work is voluntarily given up for it. In any case, she is dependent.

Or would you call the possibility of taking half of the marital gains in case of divorce independence? Rather not.

The dependency is not felt as such in functioning marriages, and that is a good thing. Nevertheless, it exists.

Since a contract can be designed, the statement that it is inherently sexist is not valid.

Or in a job where there is a right to return after absence. Or, or. But if even you see exceptions, then why the general rant?

We men really have it tough

And about sexism in general: Has any of the many men here in the forum ever had to be called a "career man" with a gross income starting at 4000?

Referring to "well"-earning women, you used the K-word with such ease... think about that.

We also have a marriage contract in which separation of property is agreed upon. I work part-time and was the one who stayed at home after the children were born.

According to the common cliché arguments here, this is a sexist disadvantage for me.

However, I earn more part-time than my husband does full-time,
and that, although he is a senior manager in a very large company.

The horizon of some people here is actually very limited and approaches zero. They then consider that their standpoint.