Why is a man not entitled to sex, affection, or romance from a woman, but a woman is entitled to a man's money after a divorce?

seeingredagain · 2014-05-26T02:46:55+00:00

Former paralegal here. The spouse who makes the most money has to pay alimony in order to maintain the lifestyle to which the couple had been accustomed to during the marriage. We had plenty of cases where the woman made more and had to pay alimony to the ex-husband.

conjunction-gumption · 2014-05-26T02:21:32+00:00

man is also entitled to a woman's money in many states, i.e. California.

[deleted] · 2014-05-26T02:43:43+00:00

Why do these strong, independent women need a man's money

What evidence do you have that most divorced women are feminists?

FWIW I'm divorced and did pay some alimony, but it seemed completely fair to me. We worked out an agreement without lawyers.

In the last five years I've dated two women who ended up paying alimony to their ex husbands.

MadM_E · 2014-05-26T02:12:10+00:00

This is comparing apples and oranges. I can talk about the issue you're referring to, but I think the question itself is flawed in a major way.

Anyway, I honestly feel women don't need spousal support if they're in an equal-opportunity partnership. I've discussed this in other posts on this sub, but I am for changing the legislation on this. The current system is unfairly stacked against fathers. The problem I see is that you can't be a proponent of traditional marriage roles and then turn around and fight spousal support and unequal custody time.

If you want a relationship where your wife doesn't work so she can take care of the kids full-time and the family is her job while yours is to be a provider, you shouldn't be surprised that you're going to be expected to continue that role. If the man is expected to be the provider and not the caretaker, I think it would make sense for the courts to expect the man to continue to support the woman so she can continue raising his children. The courts would also want her to have more time with the children than the man because she's the one doing all the child-rearing.

For childless couples where the woman can still work, no. I don't see why payments are fair or necessary.

rulenumber303 · 2014-05-26T03:49:19+00:00

Where I live people who are divorcing get a share of the marital assets, which if there is no agreement will vary according to how much each person brought into the marriage, with some consideration also given to non-cash contributions over the course of the marriage. Spousal support is rare and the legislation specifically discourages judges ordering it except in unusual circumstances, stating that a clean break is prefered.

So if any guy around here started whining that his wife left and took all his money, I'd be inclined to think it is all about having been left, and not about the money. Either that or he's a total dipshit who thinks he's entitled to all his stuff and all her stuff.

[deleted] · 2014-05-27T12:21:05+00:00

Why don't they go out and make their own?

Most of them actually do.

calcteacher · 2014-05-26T01:51:02+00:00

the money is joint

[deleted] · 2014-05-26T02:08:01+00:00

Just another troll here.

nope_nic_tesla · 2014-05-26T15:08:03+00:00

Well firstly your premise is wrong, because women aren't the only ones entitled to alimony in a marriage.

But the reasoning is this. When you are in a marriage, you enter into a partnership. When you enter into an agreement where one party is going to forego their career path and earning potential to stay home and be a caretaker, the one earning money agrees that they will provide financial support. In the event of a divorce, the caretaker has had their current and future earning potential directly harmed through the partnership arrangement, and therefore the working partner owes restitution for that.

[deleted] · 2014-05-28T00:25:43+00:00

Neither of those statements are true. A woman is not entitled to her spouse's money, a man is not entitled to affection/sex from a woman.

Aside from your complete lack of knowledge of divorce law (on par for RPs, they repeat the same BS), why in the world do you think that these things are equivalent?

Weird.

[deleted] · 2014-05-26T05:11:57+00:00

This is garbage.

CFRProflcopter · 2014-05-26T12:36:24+00:00

Just a reminder: do not to downvote. Thank you.

VarsitySlutTeamCpt · 2014-05-28T14:06:45+00:00

Simply because sex, romance, and affection cannot be measured while how much a woman can earn from an alimony can.

GridReXX · 2014-05-27T19:17:57+00:00

Why is a man not entitled to sex, affection, or romance from a woman, but a woman is entitled to a man's money after a divorce?

Last time I checked alimony isn't for the woman. It's for whomever sacrificed career advancement for the family. So there. This is entire post is based on false premises. Educate yourself next time.

That can literally be anyone. And it is increasingly becoming the case. I'm pretty sure my mom makes more than my dad and has for the past 10 years. The nature of her career as opposed to his. If they divorced, he'd be getting alimony. Not her.

[deleted] · 2014-05-27T09:17:44+00:00

Well, I would say it is literally impossible to be entitled to affection or romance - as in if it is fake it does not worth anything. Neither does sex without love worth much. It's like a human rubber doll. So it does not really worth much to be entitled to these.

OTOH American divorce law is fucked up. Imputed income, seriously? Why even? You have a fucking paycheck. Just dock a given percentage of it like with payroll taxes, easy! And why alimony to the wife, not just child support? I am Hungarian we have 20% of actual, not imputed (deducted right from the paycheck by the boss) of income per child, up to two kids. No alimony to the wife because why even? If she was a housewife she can still work as a cleaning maid or cook in food court and that is not much worse money that most men make. Perhaps in the rare cases when a man is rich and has like 5x the income of a cook or cleaner some kind of alimony makes sense as the income gap between man and woman would be too big after the divorce. But it makes sense if it is a 200% gap or 500% gap not a 30% gap. There is no point in trying to fine tune life.

GayLubeOil · 2014-05-26T06:17:58+00:00

Sharia law states that a man is entitled to have sex with his wife and in return he must provide for her. So I guess a bunch of ppl agree with your reasoning.

crankypants15 · 2014-05-27T22:35:14+00:00

Because while the rest of society goes forward, the court systems are still stuck in the 1950s.

Source: I'm divorced and lost nearly everything.

Title	Why is a man not entitled to sex, affection, or romance from a woman, but a woman is entitled to a man's money after a divorce?
Author	GreenPillEater
Upvotes	3
Comments	41
Date	May 26, 2014 1:49 AM UTC (12 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/PurplePillDebate
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/26hld5/why_is_a_man_not_entitled_to_sex_affection_or/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/PurplePillDebate/why-is-a-man-not-entitled-to-sex-affection-or.285684 https://theredarchive.com/post/285684

Comments