What my husband didn't realize was, we weren't getting a divorce.

[–]kachapati 8 points9 points10 points 15 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]domintenor23 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]kachapati 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]stemgang 6 points7 points8 points 15 years ago* (35 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]carchamp1 5 points6 points7 points 15 years ago (33 children) | Copy Link

[–]iTroll_irl 7 points8 points9 points 15 years ago (28 children) | Copy Link

[–]carchamp1 2 points3 points4 points 15 years ago (27 children) | Copy Link

[–]iTroll_irl 5 points6 points7 points 15 years ago (26 children) | Copy Link

[–]carchamp1 -3 points-2 points-1 points 15 years ago (25 children) | Copy Link

[–]iTroll_irl 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (24 children) | Copy Link

Indentured servitude != slavery != freely entered contractual agreement with no coercion to enter into agreement

The institution of marriage is not flawed in the US. It is a legal construct that people may freely enter -- it is their burden to understand what they are getting in to. The flaws come from large numbers of people not handling their obligations correctly (most marriages end in divorce, meaning they likely didn't vet partners properly or understand what marriage is) and cultural paradigms of how division of property, income, and parental rights are allocated. We are free to disagree with how those are done (I do), but that isn't the flaw of marriage.

You can file for divorce. You can file for an at fault divorce. However, anyone who entered a marriage knew (or should have known) the laws about alimony and child support going into it. Arguing to change how the system works is laudable but to complain that we men are being lied to, tricked, etc when we are not is childish.

Slavery is wrong. The idea of slavery is also entirely irrelevant to this topic. I think you need to go further.

[–]carchamp1 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago* (18 children) | Copy Link

"The institution of marriage is not flawed in the US."

You're delusional. Yah, marriage is great. It's just that the vast majority of people (you call it large numbers) who entered into it are imbeciles. Take the divorce rate, murder rate, suicide rate, disappeared rate, open marriage rate, and completely dysfunctional marriage rate and you get the complete failure of modern legal and romantic marriage. The grand experiment of the last century is on the defensive and dying a rightful death, albeit too slow for me to escape. It's nothing short of a human rights disaster.

It turns out marriage has nothing to do with love, commitment, God, etc. It's just a state welfare program paid for by slaves. This would be an honest reflection of marriage and much more appropriate than the marriage "vows" we here in our churches today:

Dearly beloved we our gathered here today to enter these two people into a legal contract which obligates the higher earner of this couple (hereinafter to be called the slave) to pay the way for his or her mooching spouse (hereinafter to be called the master) in marriage and divorce, enforceable by this state's police powers and subject to imprisonment for failure to pay.

This is the truth. WHO the fuck would sign up for that? Except gold-diggers and moochers? You would I suppose?

Marriage is a lie troll. To write here that the lies of our churches, our states, AND PEOPLE LIKE YOU to induce people into this welfare program doesn't matter is absurd.

"You can file for divorce."

Yes. I could divorce my wife, lose my child to my wife through our family courts, live in a small apartment while I'm paying for that mooching cunt to live in our single family home, lose all of the savings I'VE worked for over the last 20 years (50/50 splits are a pipe dream in my state), and pay her a good chunk of my future income through alimony and child support. Well, FUUUUUUUCK YOU! As I always say, better to be a slave WITH my daughter, in the home I'm paying for, and with money close by.

And BTW I really don't get something you're saying. First you say there's nothing wrong with marriage and then you say there's something wrong with divorce. Let me tell you that divorce IS a part of marriage. You can't separate them. If you believe there's something wrong with the division of property upon separation then how can you state there's nothing wrong with marriage. You're not making sense. Either marriage doesn't make sense for men right now (I think we both agree on this?) or it does. Which is it?

[–]iTroll_irl 5 points6 points7 points 15 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

There is something wrong with the way divorce is handled. Marriages can and sometimes should end. You clearly understand the problems with how it is handled -- the children are often forcibly separated from a loving parent, used as weapons, etc. That is clearly an abomination.

There is quite a bit of jurisprudence behind how property divisions are supposed to be done. This is true for alimony and child support as well. That you do not understand this or choose not to accept it is your problem. There are a plethora of cases where, in this case, a wife would jump at a chance to leave if she could afford to do so.

You might think about how you view things. "lose all of the savings I'VE worked for" -- this might indicate that you do not really value your partner's contribution to your marriage. Being a mother, taking care of a home, etc -- those things are work too and have financial value (look at the cost of hiring a nanny, child-care full time). It is something, quite frankly, I would not do and I have told my girlfriend this.

I agree with you that marriage doesn't make sense in many cases because most people just don't think it through before they do it.

I'm sorry your marriage sucks and that you have to choose between being involved with your daughter or not -- but if your wife were the higher earner you would be grateful that she could not legally leave you in a financial lurch. I hope it works out to a better status quo than it is now.

[–]stemgang 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[–]carchamp1 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

"There is quite a bit of jurisprudence behind how property divisions are supposed to be done. This is true for alimony and child support as well."

In my state there is really no shared (50/50) property. Because she makes next to nothing (Her choice, not mine. She has almost 10 years of higher education and one 4-year degree at my expense. One day she decided to quit her career and told me if I didn't like it she'd take my daughter.), in my state, based on disparity of incomes she and her lawyers would basically get everything should we divorce. Alimony and child support, again because she chose to be a dependent, would be crippling as well. I perfectly understand these laws. And you're right I do not accept such an outrageous distribution of assets and income. IT IS SLAVERY!

"...this might indicate that you do not really value your partner's contribution to your marriage."

This is where your ignorance or lies, I'm not sure which, really shine through. Let me say this very clearly, THERE IS NO WORK REQUIREMENT TO RECEIVE ASSETS, ALIMONY, ETC. IN A DIVORCE. None whatsoever. You don't have to lift a finger. You don't even have to have kids or take care of them. In fact, the LESS YOU DO THE MORE YOU GET! The idea that stay-at-home-moms are working themselves silly and are worth outrageous sums based on her man's income is appalling. This is 2010, not 1910.

Fundamentally, modern legal marriage is a welfare program designed to take care of dependent women. And, to this end, it has functioned wonderfully. American housewifery is lauded all over the world. We even have foreign women marrying American men, sight unseen through mail-order, to take advantage of American marital benefits. This is really quite extraordinary if you think about it. The problem is someone has to pay for all this welfare. That's where the manslave comes in!

"...but if your wife were the higher earner you would be grateful that she could not legally leave you in a financial lurch."

Very funny. Before I married my wife we sat down with the pastor to discuss our vows. Within those vows I was to make a promise to "take care of her." Bullshit! I had no intention of ever taking care of an adult. My wife, not me, argued with him for what seemed like forever to remove that vow. You see she was an "independent" woman who didn't need a man to take care of her. She won, we won, that argument. She lied. As soon as she had the chance she quit her career and used the love I have for my daughter against me. I've been taking care of her lazy, abusive ass ever since.

And please explain to me why you shouldn't be able to leave your partner in a financial lurch upon break-up? Why is this so important? Why does our society need this income distribution in today's world? Get a job if you want money, right? Get two jobs or advance yourself if you want more, right? What am I missing?

"I hope it works out to a better status quo than it is now."

The only way this gets better is if she croaks or I croak. Such is the beauty of marriage.

I appreciate the debate. Yes, I'm bitter and I know it shows. I get along the best I can for the situation I'm in. That's all I can do.

[–]AnnArchist[S] -2 points-1 points0 points 15 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]iTroll_irl 2 points3 points4 points 15 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]AnnArchist[S] 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]stemgang 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Marriage is an economic contract entailing both rights and responsibilities. Typically contracts specify penalties for breaches.

"No-fault" divorce really means that it is not possible to get married any more. Marriage has been replaced by the institution of "pre-divorce."

Marriage used to form a family, which was the foundational institution in society. Stable families raise healthy, well-adjusted children.

But easy divorce means that marriages and families are no longer stable, and children are worse off for it.

So, to address your issue regarding "punishment" and the freedom to divorce, I would say that a contract without a penalty is no contract at all. People should be free to divorce, but the party more "at-fault" should not benefit.

The current "pre-divorce" scenario is one in which the man is at grave risk. In a divorce scenario, his income is regarded as a permanent obligation, while his wife's joblessness is regarded as a permanent entitlement. That is the "no-fault" scenario.

The "at-fault" divorce scenario would not change the man's post-divorce outcome, if he were at fault, since he is already treated as though he were. However, it would dramatically change the woman's outcome, if she were to abandon the marriage, commit violence against the husband, or engage in adultery.

In the "at-fault" scenario, the maternal transgressor would no longer be rewarded with the presumption of child custody, child support, alimony, and possession of the house.

Basically, "no-fault" rewards wrong-doing within marriage, and destabilizes marriages with perverse incentives.

By contrast, "at-fault" penalizes wrong-doing, and lessens the rewards for cheating, abuse, and abandonment.

[–]iTroll_irl 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]stemgang 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]iTroll_irl 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]matches42 10 points11 points12 points 15 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]zellyman 11 points12 points13 points 15 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]jay76 2 points3 points4 points 15 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 15 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]jay76 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]kloo2yoo 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]AnnArchist[S] 4 points5 points6 points 15 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]matches42 4 points5 points6 points 15 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]AnnArchist[S] 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]carchamp1 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]AnnArchist[S] 2 points3 points4 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]carchamp1 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 15 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]carchamp1 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]AnnArchist[S] 4 points5 points6 points 15 years ago* (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]kragshot 7 points8 points9 points 15 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–]zapper877 8 points9 points10 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]AnnArchist[S] 4 points5 points6 points 15 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]kragshot 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]AnnArchist[S] 3 points4 points5 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]jay76 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]carchamp1 7 points8 points9 points 15 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]AnnArchist[S] 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]FapFappington 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]AnnArchist[S] 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]jay76 -1 points0 points1 point 15 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]carchamp1 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]jay76 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]carchamp1 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

"...and not simply fall apart due to one members wishes."

I would agree that there should be some waiting/cooling off period. BUT, in the end, it's bad public policy to force people to stay in relationships. There were very real costs to forcing people to stay together when divorce was much harder to achieve (much higher rates of domestic violence).

"Maybe I am expecting too much of people to refrain from making commitments when they know there is a significant likelihood that they will not be able to uphold it. As I stated, I don't think any rational person would consider marriage a good idea, but then we are probably the least rational when we are in love."

Yes. Lifelong romantic coupling and "happily ever after" are fantasies of which many people are infected. This "high" is just not a good basis for public policy.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]AnnArchist[S] 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 15 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]carchamp1 2 points3 points4 points 15 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

A free country's government doesn't get involved in relationships between consenting adults.

A free country's government doesn't tax some people more heavily than others, or grant to corporations rights that their constituent individuals do not possess.

A free country's government does not tell people what to think, feel or believe.

A free country's government does not engage in censorship of any kind, or keep secrets from its citizens.

A free country's government does not subsidize religion, or subsidize anything.

A free country's government doesn't use taxes as a tool of social engineering.

A free country's government understands that it exists on sufferance, and does not engage in social engineering.

A free country's government doesn't make criminals of people who do not violate the rights of others to their lives, liberty, and property.

A free country's government has no idea what the word "contraband" means.

By these standards, the United States is not and has never been a free country.

[–]carchamp1 2 points3 points4 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]EllaMai 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Title	What my husband didn't realize was, we weren't getting a divorce.
Author	AnnArchist
Upvotes	22
Comments	62
Date	August 30, 2010 8:50 PM UTC (15 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/d7ecz/what_my_husband_didnt_realize_was_we_werent/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/what-my-husband-didnt-realize-was-we-werent.1047783 https://theredarchive.com/post/1047783

Comments