From WomenPayingSupport.com--'Be a Man...Don't Ask for Spousal Support
October 23rd, 2007 by Glenn Sacks, MA for Fathers & Families
"You've never heard complaints about paying child support until it's a woman who has to pay it."--Seattle Family Law Attorney Lisa Scott
"The only way to abolish alimony is to make women pay it."--Tom Leykis, nationally-syndicated talk show host.
When men work hard to support their families, they're often accused of victimizing their poor wives who have to stay at home, chained to their children. The National Organization for Women and other feminist groups often argue that these men don't deserve joint custody after divorce because they "never took primary responsibility for raising their kids while they were married." When divorce comes and men have to pay child support and alimony, they dare not complain, or they'll be accused of disrespecting their long-suffering ex-wives who sacrificed their careers for their families.
So if men who are primary breadwinners can't win, what about men who are primary caregivers? As usual with the gender wars, men can't win here, either. Primary caregiving men are often looked upon with contempt by society and sometimes their wives, while their value as caregivers is short shrifted, as mom is still the "real" parent.
(Example--I've been my kids' primary caregiver for the past nine years, but whenever there's a new employee at my kids' schools, they call my wife at her office during the day if one of our kids is ill and needs to go home early.)
(Another example--I recall a meeting at my son's school several years ago when a visiting female administrator walked in, warmly greeted my wife, and then looked at me and asked, "And who might you be?" I felt like replying, "The person who's taken my kids to school, picked them up and done their homework with them every day, as well as having gone to every single Parent Conference/Back to School Night/Open House for the last I don't know how many years." I stifled it and just replied "I'm the dad," at which point she said hello and then turned to my wife and began explaining the issues my son was having. I wish I had it on film.)
(One more example--A little while ago I actually read a feminist blogger criticize me for victimizing my poor, hard-working wife and sponging off of her, a phrase I've never heard her use when describing a woman who both works full-time and is the primary caregiver for her children. For the record, I earn a living with my writing, etc., and my wife wants to be a stay-at-home mom about as much as she'd like to test experimental parachute designs.)
As the press release below shows, when divorce comes, primary caregiving men had better not dare ask for child support or alimony, or they're not "real men."
Funny how when dad is the primary breadwinner, it's poor mom who is the burdened one, yet when mom is the primary breadwinner, all of a sudden she's the hard-working hero and dad is a lazy bum. In reality, despite the "lazy husband" myth, research clearly shows that both men and women contribute an equal number of hours towards their households--to learn more, see my co-authored column Are American Husbands Slackers? (Tallahassee Democrat, 3/22/06).
Unlike many in the men's and fathers' movement, I believe that alimony does have a place. I believe alimony is warranted when one partner--male or female--really has put aside or cut back his or her career to be the primary caregiver for his or her children, and is economically disadvantaged because of it. I certainly think alimony can be abused, usually by women but occasionally by men.
Below is a new press release I just received from www.WomenPayingSupport.com. In their view, men who receive alimony are lazy bums, and they attempt to shame men out of it by using the phrase always used to get men to do something which is not in their best interest--"Be a Man." That being said, the ladies may well have a legitimate grievance. But if we're going to tackle the inequities of divorce and family law in order of importance, we have many, many problems to tackle before we get all the way down to the problem of women paying alimony.
Women are Increasingly Paying Spousal Support;
WomenPayingSupport.com Launched
You don't have to be as successful as Britney Spears or Reese Witherspoon to fear getting sued for alimony. Like the founder of WomenPayingSupport.com, more women today are obligated to pay their ex-husbands some form of financial support. Call it the dark side of the liberation coin.
SACRAMENTO, Calif., October 18, 2007 - The picture of equality looks awfully strange to a 36-year old State of California worker and business owner. (AKA "Ms. Bread Winner".) She pays her ex, a 41 year-old fellow state worker, hundreds of dollars per month in temporary spousal support.
He's not seeking alimony to help pay for their son's after-school sports program or music lessons - there are none. Nor was he instrumental in building Ms. Bread Winner's business as he sat on the couch, smoked pot and professed he was "sick" throughout their 15-year marriage. The daughter of an Air Force Master Sergeant, she started working for the state when she was 18 and has since risen and excelled as an IT Analyst. She's also worked furiously to ensure the additional education and success of her home business while raising a family. Small wonder she is outraged at having to write a monthly alimony check.
"I thought spousal support was for people who were out of the work force, to raise a family for example. It might take them longer to support themselves.", says Ms. Bread Winner. "Maybe it's my upbringing, but it never occurred to me that I, as a woman, would have to pay spousal support. It was bad enough that I primarily supported him when we were married, but to continue when we are divorced?! I'm so mad that I created a pixel support website, www.WomenPayingSupport.com where people can vent and get a t-shirt with my logo on it!"
No doubt Ms. Bread Winner will find more than a few buyers for her t-shirts. The idea that men can receive spousal support from their ex-wives may feel like a freakish concept but as the alpha-earner woman by need, not desire as in the case of Ms. Bread Winner, have emerged, it's increasingly common.
A lot of women are indignant now that the shoe is increasingly on the other foot, says Carol Ann Wilson, a certified financial divorce practitioner in Boulder, Colo. "There's a sense of, "What's yours is ours, but what's mine is mine." Wilson says, "My first response to that is, "All these years we have been carrying our families while looking for equality; well this is what it looks like upon divorce. I know women get angrier about having to pay than men do."
The ordeal has been played up in gossip magazines and tabloids, which have closely followed countless examples of celebrity breakups in which men have sought, or have threatened to seek, spousal support. Teen idol Nick Lachey reportedly requested the right to seek spousal support from ex-wife pop singer Jessica Simpson last year. [Lachey is seven years older than Simpson and worth significantly less.] In another splashy case, Hardy Boy Parker Stevenson sought $18,000 per month from actress Kristie Ally when they divorced, just to cover the rent on his Bel Air home. As men set their sights on women's earnings, women have become more protective of those dollars.
In fact, according to the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers, 44% of all attorneys included in a recent survey said they've seen an increase in men wanting alimony and more and more women asking for prenuptial agreements over the last five years, where in previous decades, prenuptial agreements and alimony were almost always sought by men. Just as women object to men's request for spousal support, some real men are particularly uncomfortable seeking it. Either they find it emasculating to ask, or they find the idea of receiving an allowance from their ex-wives humiliating. Right or not, as women's earnings grow, so will their financial responsibility during divorce. That's equality for you.
Contact: Press Room
916-648-1884
media@womenpayingsupport.com
www.WomenPayingSupport.com
"));
19 queries. 0.404 seconds.
October 23rd, 2007 at 12:59 pm
'Real men'
And while feminists have fought long and hard to counter outdated and generic steriotypes of women; here we see those same steriotypes of men, being used to force men to act a certain way.
If I'm correct, that's exactly what the white feather women who shamed men into their deaths during WW1 said. Be a man.
Essentially these people are saying, we're greedy, and it's your duty as a man to support that. A woman CAN focus on her carreer, but when it comes down to who has to pay, men still bear that burden.
I don't normally write like this, but what an utter pile of shit.
October 23rd, 2007 at 1:12 pm
So people should be able to get out of paying spousal support by claiming that their ex was lazy?
Sounds like a new standard for everyone!
October 23rd, 2007 at 1:32 pm
Women want equality when it's convenient. You'll notice they never protested the fact that they do NOT have to register for the draft, but then are very vocal about wanting a woman to be commander in chief.
This is why I warn you not to warm up to the Amanda Marcotts of the world. You're crazy if you think their goal is equality -- it's tyranny.
October 23rd, 2007 at 1:48 pm
I don't have a problem with someone seeking spousal support if they were taking care of the children while the other parent is working. That is fine. Being a stay-at-home parent is a full time job and in case of divorce, the parent that was taking care of the children was putting off their career and thus should get some measure of alimony for the amount of time that they were taking care of the children. What I find so disgusting and hypocritical from these femasupremasists is that when the roles are reversed, then they are the ones that cry the most about their responsibilities. Be a man and don't seek spousal support if you were the stay-at-home parent and being the full time parent for you and your spouse's children while your spouse is away creating wealth and career experience for themselves? WTF!?!? Obviously if the couple didn't have children, or the spouse was not contributing to the wealth of the other spouse (such as one person working for nothing for the other spouses business to get it up and running or something like that), then no, the person does not deserve any alimony upon a divorce. However, if they were contributing to either of these things stated above, then yes, they do deserve some spousal support. So, in my opinion, if you were the stay-at-home dad and took care of the children while your wife is getting work experience and building a career, then if she seeks a divorce (and we know for a fact that most divorces are initiated by women) then : BE A MAN AND SEEK SPOUSAL SUPPORT. Don't let the femasupremasists fool and shame you into thinking otherwise. You deserve it, and you will need it to get time to get a career of your own going. Manning up to a situation does not only mean stepping up to the plate of responsibility, it also mean stepping up to the plate of fairness and justice. Femasupremasists don't understand this concept, so don't expect them to agree with this belief. What is important is that you understand this principle, no matter what others think.
October 23rd, 2007 at 2:46 pm
testing experimental parachute designs
All else being equal, that sounds like a really fun job.
October 23rd, 2007 at 3:19 pm
One way to accelerate the demise of the present family court regime would be as follows:
1. provide top-quality legal backing to as many men as possible with "super-strong" cases as possible to help them win custody in those states known for excessive child support awards
2. demand a mirror image support award against the "mother" with income, and sue under the equal protectection clause any judge who fails to give such an award
3. massively publicize the fact that a WOMAN lost custody and that a WOMAN is paying so many thousands of dollars per month.
It is important that the losing woman not be a rock star or other "unusual case" parent, but just a regular woman with a regular job and stay-at-home husband or simply lesser-paid, mostly at-home husband.
As this information circulates among women, I can guarantee you that the rate of women filing for divorce and dragging men into court will fall.
Right now, women feel that the court is their privilege, taking the kids is their right, being paid endlessly is their due, and men are the grist to fuel their needs
But many, many women are fundamentally self-protective in their nature, and don't like being stuck with significant cash outlays to someone else.
So, this is a way to slowly strangle the gender-biased divorce industry.
Might be worth putting some funds and efforts behind it.
Could render lots of ligitation-mongering pig lawyers underemployed at family court, so they would have to move over to chasing ambulances or some other activity within their capabilities -- like driving cabs.
October 23rd, 2007 at 3:24 pm
What feminists are really after is not equality it is servtitude. A man should serve them no matter what. Thay already have more than equality. While more men drop out of high school, many times more than women, there are only
federally funded programs for girls. Women can get into college easier than men. More women are enrolled in college than men. A woman does not have to be even close to being competitive with a man to get a job in the fire department or police department. If a relationship fails the man has automatically failed to maintain the relationship.
If she cheated, he drove her to it. If she is mentally or emotionally ill some man is behind it. The feminists just want men to serve them and be quiet. If they ( women) move on to another relationship the last man should pay and each subsequent man should pay in sequence. A man should just be an ATM to dispense money at the woman's request and be on call if she decides she needs something. Women have the right to vote and equality to anything they choose to participate in. What they don't want is equality in family court where they currently have a huge advantage. Equality would be losing this advantage and actually being treated equal. No lady wants that!
October 23rd, 2007 at 3:38 pm
Besides, the suffragettes of yesterday were of a totally different breed to today's feminists. They wanted to give women rights they needed in a rapidly changing society. People like Glenn try and do that today (what use would shared parenting be in the fifties?) while the feminists are as reactionary as they wish if it benefits women.
October 23rd, 2007 at 3:52 pm
Glenn, you should buy an ad on there and link it to this post. Specifically, you should link it directly to my comment, which would likely cause a rupture in the space/time continuum.
That and it'd be funny.
October 23rd, 2007 at 5:18 pm
That was a great story. Men have been paying spousal support and alimony for years and now that the tables have turned they want to complain. I about fell out of my chair laughing at this one.
Whats good for the goose is good for the gander. Welcome to equality ladies....Hope you enjoy the ride.
Hilarious!!!!!
October 23rd, 2007 at 5:34 pm
Hahahaha....
I love equal opportunity.
October 23rd, 2007 at 8:00 pm
Glenn- this blog entry should have read "Not recommended for the irony-challenged"
October 23rd, 2007 at 10:08 pm
I, too, love equal opportunity.
If the foo shits, wear it.
October 23rd, 2007 at 10:47 pm
I sent the site a comment telling them of their selfish and immature behaviour. No doubt they'll just put their head in the sand but you know never know. I wonder if they actually know how selfish they're being?
October 24th, 2007 at 3:53 am
There's some real attitude problems among a sub-set of our female population. Look at women losing in custody and the related matters:
- he is the stay at home parent: She demands she get custody
- she is the stay at home parent: She demands she get custody
- he gives up everything or becomes too sick to work: She should not have to pay spousal support
- she gives up everything or becomes too sick to work: He of course must pay spousal support
- she has custody: He pays child support
- he has custody: No one pays child support
On and on it goes. I wonder how big this group is? Large, obviously, but How Large? (20% 40% 60% 80%)???
October 24th, 2007 at 9:59 am
Why is something like this less likely to happen to you if you are fortunate enough to live in the State of California?
Hint: “Most recently, CAFC has been instrumental in bringing about state and Federal changes to protect the parental rights of military parents.” http://www.cafcusa.org/military_parents.aspx.
Michael Robinson didn't do this alone, but he kept the candle burning in the face of the most outrageous and sickening opposition you have ever seen.
Leather-on-marble* is the ONLY way stuff like this gets done, and to my knowledge, California is the only state in the nation having one.
DanH
* "leather-on-marble" refers to pounding the State Capitol floors day and night to be at the right place at the right time to get the right words in and the wrong words out of whatever is going on.
October 24th, 2007 at 11:19 am
As the article said: 'That's equality for you.'. Women wanted it. Women got it. Warts and all. You don't get to pick the bits you want and throw away the bits you don't.
What's good for the goose is good for the gander (an appropriate saying here in the UK).
October 24th, 2007 at 12:47 pm
Goodness Gracious, women having financial obligations? What vile form of patriarchy could have brought for this this....this... equality?
Surely the system must be broken!!
/sarcasm
October 24th, 2007 at 8:58 pm
There shouldn’t be any spousal or child support paid by either men or women. When there is a divorce each person should be responsible for their own finances and share equally in the care and custody of their children.
The only losers in this scenario are parasitic lawyers, Family Courts, and all of the other associated parasites normally linked with the breakup of families. The “state” also needs to find other sources for their revenue.
Kevin Merck
October 25th, 2007 at 12:50 am
Now that we're seeking equality for women, they need to decide what entitlements and priveledges they are going to give up first!!
October 25th, 2007 at 2:45 pm
«Now that we're seeking equality for women, they need to decide what entitlements and priveledges they are going to give up first!!»
Nope, we have to decide for them just as they decided for us.
October 25th, 2007 at 7:14 pm
When little 9 year old Brittney can demand Daddy get her a ticket to a Hanna Montana concert at $4,300 a seat, what do you think she will be like at age 12? How about 6 months into each of her upcoming five marriages?
DanH
October 25th, 2007 at 9:24 pm
With equal rights comes equal responsibility. Women who want equal rights must accept this.
October 26th, 2007 at 3:27 pm
why don't women be "real women" and spend more time taking care of kids, cook, clean?
October 30th, 2007 at 8:36 am
In our case, the judge did not care that my husband's ex has more money than us (she probable is worth somewhere between 5 & 10 times what we are - only financially speaking, of course). The judge still ordered my husband to pay her alimony - approximately 1/4 of his salary.
This judge should be disbarred if only for being STUPID!!
October 30th, 2007 at 3:36 pm
I think this lady is really outrageous! I want to take her quote from her website, and turn it around to illustrate a point:
"After 15 years of marriage, most of it in debt, I decided that I had enough. I wanted to be free of this marriage as I felt not as a husband or father, but as the breadwinner, chauffeur, cook, and handyman - most of all, unappreciated. (Yeah, brotherss...I was working a full time job, had a home business, cooked dinners that my family didn't respect enough to come eat with me, paid bills, did home improvements until 2am, went to night school...just call me SUPERMAN...or more like SUPERSTUPID!!)
So what does this have to do with SPOUSAL SUPPORT, you ask? Let me tell you...because I made so much more money than her when I filed for divorce, I was ordered by the court to PAY HER SPOUSAL SUPPORT. I just about supported her in our marriage and now I STILL HAVE TO PAY!"
So, if a man had posted a statement like this, he would immediately be condemned as being sexist and a woman hater, etc. How many times have women who were housewives with no children gotten divorced and received alimony? Somehow, it's ok when a woman does this, but not a man. I really feel like I'm taking crazy pills when people say things like this woman. Women fought for equality, but as soon as that equality becomes inconvenient, they don't want it anymore. This woman is just plain crazy.
October 30th, 2007 at 5:00 pm
Let us not forget, women want warm ice, and see nothing contradictory in the request.
October 31st, 2007 at 8:41 am
John T Says:
October 30th, 2007 at 3:36 pm
^^^ ^^^ ^^^
Why not try it on a site like pandagon or another of your choice? I figured I would give you first crack at it to test it if not I will do it for you... let me know...
b
October 31st, 2007 at 9:06 am
@ Bernie: Not sure what you're talking about there.
October 31st, 2007 at 9:22 am
John T Says:
October 30th, 2007 at 3:36 pm
So, if a man had posted a statement like this, he would immediately be condemned as being sexist and a woman hater, etc. How many times have women who were housewives with no children gotten divorced and received alimony? Somehow, it's ok when a woman does this, but not a man. I really feel like I'm taking crazy pills when people say things like this woman. Women fought for equality, but as soon as that equality becomes inconvenient, they don't want it anymore. This woman is just plain crazy.
^^^ ^^^ ^^^
You can prove your theory of posting your reverse statement on another site...it would be worth it to see the reaction and then after the reaction show them (this) original thread...
Have fun…
B
November 11th, 2007 at 2:03 pm
There's an old saying "Beware of what you ask for, because you just might get it!". Women asked for equality when what they really wanted was superiority. In this case, they GOT equality and they are torqued off that THEY are the ones having to shell out the bucks to their ex! Ladies would you like some cheese to go with that whine? This is TOO FUNNY!
January 17th, 2008 at 12:51 pm
I am a female and I am sometimes really ashamed to be in the same category - if a woman and a man get divorced then the woman can durn sure get her butt out and GET A JOB !! I am sick to death of hearing how women should be able to live the same lifestyle as before the divorce - which is fine and good but if you want that to happen then you pay for it yourself ! Little Johnny and Janey dont NEED the private tennis and ballet lessons - sorry - get over yoursleves ladies - you aren't all that special that you can't go out and work - so many times I see that woman want their lifestlyes to go unchanged and its paid for by the ex husband which is GARBAGE - so in the meantime the women go on about their happy lives supported by the ex and the man live in poverty to support that ? Why arent the men allowed to keep THEIR lifestyle up also ?
Sorry ladies but this is one woman that agrees with the fact that some women only want equality when it is convenient for their own personal agenda - my ex husband raised his 4 daughters from 1976 all alone without a dime of money from his ex wife and he was happy to do it also
January 17th, 2008 at 2:24 pm
I would like see a man that has had a personal experience with this alimony disaster send his story this site. The story should be honest and without embellishment, with one exception - substitute his name for hers and hers for his. Allow them to make their comments - then tell them the genders/names have been reversed and ask, "Do you still feel the same."
I'm not particularly fond of such an approach (as it lacks integrity) but would make an exception because I believe what it would reveal would be of greater significance.
April 8th, 2008 at 4:04 pm
LOL I LOVE THIS .... greatest website ever .... its should be called .... ishouldnothavetopaybecauseihaveatwat.com
May 20th, 2008 at 4:36 am
I'd like to say womenwhiningandwhiningagain that they do NOT define if I am a man or not, and then to look at themselves in a mirror... if it manages to reflect them, and ask themselves, what would they do, were they men.
Wow, the USA seem a nghtmare country.
May 21st, 2008 at 2:14 pm
marco,
It can be at times but we have the right and duty as citizens to have conversations like these and affect changes.
b
June 10th, 2008 at 8:53 am
When I hear someone say "be a man" I get enraged. It's aboslutly crap to be used to force people to do what they want you to do and it's always something not in your best interest.
I would love to see someone say the crap to someone and have them "be a man". LIke some little meak guy on DR PHIL be told to be a man by him (hear him say it once in a while) and have the little guy get up and stomp on his skull and say Hows that for manly?
Wow silly post.. sorry about that. It really really gets me angry when I hear that crap.
June 10th, 2008 at 9:03 am
While I am all for getting that small immediate victory, I am more for the long haul.
I have always wondered what sets Judges apart from the rest of mankind. Is it their awesome responsibility, or just their cool looking black robes?
I have always considered Judges to be the last venue of sanity and truth in this crazy world ( I know, I should wake up) and therefore be able to cut through the bull and be equitable.
That however is not the case at all. Even though Judges have legal immunity from their decisions, most have been swayed by the stupidest arguments thus yielding ludicrous judgments.
The judge MUST remain impartial. Man or Woman does not matter. Facts matter. Look at the facts, not the story, and render a common sense verdict.
If the Judges took back their court rooms, and stood up to public pressure, the advantage of either party would be eradicated, leaving only fairness. (I did not say leaving only the Law, because the Law is not fair and is swayed by elected officials, but that is a topic for another time)
If a man or woman entering the court room knew there were no favorites, civility and fairness would be prevalent.
A divorce should go like this:
1) Judge requires couple to seek counseling. (Personal, Financial and Spiritual) Third party counselor (not involved in the initial counseling and not known to the divorcing party) reviews results and makes a recommendation to the court, yes proceed, or no more counseling. (Court offices dispenses the cases to the counselors at random)
2) Judges dockets are for non reconcilable couples.
3) ANY who are not earning a wage as a result of child rearing are awarded 6 months of spousal support. (NON Negotiable)
4) Unless one of the parents were involved in a crime, BOTH parents are to raise the child. ( none of the setting one parent over the other)
5) Child support (money) is to be awarded by income level as averaged by the last 3 years of federal returns. This amount is to be reviewed every five years, and adjusted accordingly. Regardless of gender.
I divorced in 1998, and seen the atrocities of the courts regarding the bias that has affect my own kids. I wish there were remedies in place for the kids, not the "mother", but alas that is not the case.
I am glad to see some reversals of the conspiracy that suprafeminists have on the courts regarding divorce law, but i would caution against the pendulum swinging our way too much.
Lets definitely "Be The Man" and show our compassion and leadership by tempring the erratic emotion that if the female.
P.S. My ex-wife is now returning to me the monthly child support I have paid to her because our last child is now living with me. She has not considered that she is paying nothing of her own.
I do not dare take her to court to remedy this because that would mean she would have to surrender 20% of her net income, she would no longer have the tax deduction for her income, she would be responsible for paying for the medical insurance as well as losing the $600 I am getting back from her.
I am convince that in the face of that loss, she would yank our 16 year old child back into the depravity I rescued her from.
So I am being "A Man" and shouldering the burden. Yes, I am damned proud of it.
June 10th, 2008 at 9:33 am
I am completely annoyed by this! So many scream how things are so unfair - how men get paid more - how we women are just oppressed BUT then comes the "dark side of the equality coin" as referenced in the article...EQUALITY IN ORDERING ALIMONY IN DIVORCE.
Wow, hold on a minute!! (can you feel the sarcasm seething from me?) How in the world could things have gone so skewed? Feminists scream for equality but they want equality on their terms...in the sense of they want equality when it benefits THEM. (And an extra bit of girl power roar if that same equality happens to hit men below the belt...apparently!)
This seems to be the classic case of wanting your proverbial cake and eating it too! If I was a feminist, and I assure you I am not, I would be appalled at the way that feminists make women VICTIMS no matter what happens. How could we, as women, accomplish anything if we are always being victimized? By pity I guess. But that for me would only bring nothing but self loathing!
So this woman, that is so mad she was placed in a position to pay alimony by her own hard work and success, decided to start a site with a motto of "Be a man among men, don't ask for spousal support." How would that work for the other side of the coin? Be a woman amongst women...don't ask for spousal support. I bet the feminist cries would be heard round the world!!
I think that feminism began with a noble concept - that men and women should be treated equally. However, the ideas of feminists today irritate me. Women are victims, do no wrong unless led astray by men (which one would think would show that women are of low character and low intellect since we are supposedly so easily led down a bad path by men! That type of person is hardly deserving of all the benefits and opportunities that this supposedly male dominated world has to offer), and are constantly oppressed by this patriarchal thinking. How absurd!
To all the feminists out there, let this be a clear warning...fighting for "equality" doesn't just mean that it works IN your favor...it can work against you. Don't be pissed when you are subjected to the same outlandish bs that men have been subjected to for years! Men, if you are entitled to alimony, by all means ask for it!
June 30th, 2008 at 6:46 pm
To the women Paying Group,
The true enemy here are all the lawyers, feeding from our misery. If we don't get it yet, that it is not an issue of men vs women it's the lawyers that profit regardless of the gender.
United with the same cause as most of you I represent a group of women as a 2nd wife who's husband has to pay for life to his former spouse. Please visit our site to see the efforts and gains being made here on behalf of all who are in the same boat.
We are finding great success with media coverage because both men and women payors and the 2nd wives club have united with one common cause, " to stop the insanity "
The divorce lawyers and probate judges who have lucrative practices built upon the pain of those going through the divorce process,do not want to see lifetime alimony come to an end as this is would severely curtail their cash flow.
Additionally, they seem to ignore the fact that lifetime alimony, in and of itself, is unconstitutional. 1) It forces one into involuntary servitude (13th Amendment) 2) We are not allowed to enjoy the fruits of our labors (14th Amendment - Pursuit of Life, Liberty and to enjoy the fruits of one's labors . Our privacy is invaded by the courts and former spouses, 2nd wives income is included to calculate and grant alimony awards even though the lawyers and judges would say not so. There are a number of other arguments that are routinely ignored by those who benefit by the alimony scheme. My husband's ex claims that it is her "right" to have alimony. I don't see this right in the State or US Constitution anywhere.
Those who have been forced to pay lifetime alimony are treated worse than criminals. Criminals can seek parole, probation whatever. The family/probate court system strips one individual of all rights to benefit another. Someone who is capable of work, usually has skills but chooses to work part-time or not at all while our choices are taken from us.
I am a 2nd wife being forced to pay my husband's ex wife alimony by virtue of the fact that we are married. It is time for a well needed change.
August 3rd, 2008 at 5:22 pm
The irony is delicious.
Carry your own baggage. Open your own door. Pay for your own dinner. Fix your own central heating. Do military service. And pay alimony.
Welcome to equality girls, you got just what you wanted!
September 6th, 2009 at 6:15 pm
i filed for divorce from my husband. We were your average earning people. not celebrities - not making huge amounts of money. The next day, he left his job by taking early retirement and then filed for spousal support - only way he would take that away was if i signed off on his pension fund. We have been married 34 years and the family mediator said I would probably have to pay most of what he was seeking if i didnt sign off the pension. I wasnt seeking spousal support - just wanted a divorce. I said screw it. I moved back and now go on with whatever i wanted to do but dam if i am going to pay any support. "Then just recently he went ahead and filed for early social security so now he will be making the same amount as me and he stays home every day not doing anything.