Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I just feel that if men and women are equal then there is no need for one party to support the other after the marriage ends except in special circumstances. ...
Alimony was originally intended to protect older women from being deserted by their husbands at a time where employment options for women were next to nil. Nowadays, women have equal access to education and employment opportunities.
I think alimony is still perfectly valid for spouses who have stayed home, kept house and raised the children. Many men still want a housewife and stay-at-home mom. They don't want their wives to work or go to school. That's fine, but if the marriage ends, the housewife is entitled to some kind of support.
I think alimony is still perfectly valid for spouses who have stayed home, kept house and raised the children. Many men still want a housewife and stay-at-home mom. They don't want their wives to work or go to school. That's fine, but if the marriage ends, the housewife is entitled to some kind of support.
In these situations I can see how alimony might be justified, especially if the husband is the one who initiated the divorce and is "trading in for a new model" but once the children hit adulthood support should end.
Also, if she's booting the husband for vauge reasons like "I'm bored" or wants to chase bikers then she shouldn't get a dime of alimony.
I think alimony is still perfectly valid for spouses who have stayed home, kept house and raised the children. Many men still want a housewife and stay-at-home mom. They don't want their wives to work or go to school. That's fine, but if the marriage ends, the housewife is entitled to some kind of support.
Is she? She accepted the risks that comes with getting married, having kids, etc. just as the man did. It's a big life choice, but in todays gender equal society things like alimony have no place. If she didn't get a prenup then that's her fault and will have to live with her decisions.
Equality feminists saw to it that women have equal opportunity, and I'm all for that, but what you're arguing for is equal result. Hello communism! Quite frankly the entire entitlement mentality that permeates female thinking in western society is exactly what's wrong with a lot of westernized women. Repeat after me: the only entitlement you have is to equal opportunity. If you want to be supported then get your ass a J-O-B.
Mark my words, alimony will go by the wayside ASAP the minute it becomes commonplace for men to receive it as often as women do. The minute ex wives start to be forced to pay alimony if their husbands earn less than them you will see either the feminist movement push to have it abolished or the number of women filing for divorce plummet.
It's SLOWLY becoming more common for women to have to pay alimony, which is to be expected as my generation has seen women gain equal access to education and employment and therefore higher salaries.
If marriages were actually, "till death do we part" there would be no problems with divorcees.---but those are just warm feel good words, and mean nothing.
It's SLOWLY becoming more common for women to have to pay alimony, which is to be expected as my generation has seen women gain equal access to education and employment and therefore higher salaries.
I believe child support is SLOWLY becoming the same way.
She accepted the risks that comes with getting married, having kids, etc. just as the man did.
I agree. Wanting a wife who stays at home to take care of the house and children is a risk. If you don't want a dependent wife, don't marry one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nutz76
It's a big life choice, but in todays gender equal society things like alimony have no place. If she didn't get a prenup then that's her fault and will have to live with her decisions.
I agree with your premise, but not your wording. As things currently stand, if there was no pre-nup, that's his fault and he will have to live with his decision. If a man wants a wife who will sacrifice her education and career to keep house and raise the children--a perfectly respectable thing to do--then he is accepts the responsibility of taking care of his wife. I'm not saying that the current laws are perfect, but they are well-intentioned and well-founded. If a woman (or man) gives up a couple decades of earning potential and is then divorced, she (or he) deserves better than to work at Walmart because she has no other skills. If she had started her career 20 years ago, she would not be starting at the bottom. And if the family accumulated wealth over the years due to her support and care, then she deserves a chunk of it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nutz76
Equality feminists saw to it that women have equal opportunity, and I'm all for that, but what you're arguing for is equal result. Hello communism! Quite frankly the entire entitlement mentality that permeates female thinking in western society is exactly what's wrong with a lot of westernized women. Repeat after me: the only entitlement you have is to equal opportunity. If you want to be supported then get your ass a J-O-B.
Many men and women feel that staying home to keep house and raise children is a noble and respectable thing to do. If you don't want that kind of wife, fine. Don't marry one.
I agree. Wanting a wife who stays at home to take care of the house and children is a risk. If you don't want a dependent wife, don't marry one.
I agree with your premise, but not your wording. As things currently stand, if there was no pre-nup, that's his fault and he will have to live with his decision. If a man wants a wife who will sacrifice her education and career to keep house and raise the children--a perfectly respectable thing to do--then he is accepts the responsibility of taking care of his wife. I'm not saying that the current laws are perfect, but they are well-intentioned and well-founded. If a woman (or man) gives up a couple decades of earning potential and is then divorced, she (or he) deserves better than to work at Walmart because she has no other skills. If she had started her career 20 years ago, she would not be starting at the bottom. And if the family accumulated wealth over the years due to her support and care, then she deserves a chunk of it.
Many men and women feel that staying home to keep house and raise children is a noble and respectable thing to do. If you don't want that kind of wife, fine. Don't marry one.
But the problem is that alimony is routinely awarded to women coming out of childless marriages. It's awarded to women who make as much or more than their husbands or have as much or more education. How is this fair?
But the problem is that alimony is routinely awarded to women coming out of childless marriages. It's awarded to women who make as much or more than their husbands or have as much or more education. How is this fair?
I don't know what is "routine," but I agree that alimony is not fair (or does not seem to be fair) in every instance. I was responding to a statement that alimony is never fair.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
