This nikka is dumb.
First off, your definition of benefiting from divorce is if the wife makes more money than the couple's combined income when together, which is a shytty and illogical way of determining if she "benefits". If the woman leaves the relationship with more than she came in with, she has benefited from the divorce - plain and simple.
And in situations where the man is seriously crippled financially from divorce, and the woman eats off his misfortune, how can you say the woman doesn't benefit? She is richer than she was before they got together so how did she not benefit?
Also, this assumes that incomes are being split evenly during the marriage, which is rare from what I've seen.