TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

  • Subreddits

      Popular

    • /r/askTRP
    • /r/TheRedPill
    • /r/MarriedRedPill
    • /r/MensRights
    • /r/MGTOW
    • /r/PurplePillDebate
    • /r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen
    • Other

    • /r/AllPillDebate
    • /r/AlreadyRed
    • /r/altTRP
    • /r/AntiFeminists
    • /r/askFDS
    • /r/askMRP
    • /r/askRPC
    • /r/becomeaman
    • /r/BlackPillScience
    • /r/Chadfish
    • /r/Divorce_Men
    • /r/EverydayMisandry
    • /r/ExRedPill
    • /r/FemaleDatingStrategy
    • /r/FeminismStopsWhen
    • /r/GEOTRP
    • /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
    • /r/MalePsychology
    • /r/Male_Studies
    • /r/MenSupportMen
    • /r/MGTOW2
    • /r/MuslimRedPill
    • /r/newTRP
    • /r/PussyPass
    • /r/PussyPassDenied
    • /r/RedPillBooks
    • /r/RedPillParenting
    • /r/RedPillWives
    • /r/RedPillWomen
    • /r/RedPillWorkplace
    • /r/RPChristians
    • /r/seduction
    • /r/ThankTRP
    • /r/TheRedPillStories
    • /r/trpGAME
    • /r/TRPOffTopic
    • /r/TrueBlackPillMGTOW
    • /r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre
  • Blogs

      Popular

    • Dalrock
    • Heartiste
    • Illimitable Men
    • Return of Kings
    • Rian Stone
    • The Rational Male
    • Woujo
    • Other

    • Artful Prudence
    • A Voice for Men
    • Alpha Game
    • Black Label Logic
    • Caleb Jones
    • Captain Capitalism
    • Corporate Machiavelli
    • Days of Game
    • Deep Strength
    • Dicipres
    • Donal Graeme
    • Female Misogynist
    • Free Northerner
    • Gaming My Wife
    • Good Looking Loser
    • Hawaiian Libertarian
    • In Mala Fide
    • KillToParty
    • Kill Your Inner Loser
    • Krauser PUA
    • LaidNYC
    • Married Man Sex Life
    • NO MA'AM
    • Omega Virgin Revolt
    • Pook's Mill
    • Random Xpat Rantings
    • Red Pill Theory
    • Red Pill Wifery
    • RedPillDad
    • RedPillDoctor
    • Seasons of Tumult and Discord
    • Sigma Frame
    • The Feminine Woman
    • The Futurist
    • The Masculine Principle
    • The Modern Man
    • The New Modern Man
    • The Obsidian Files
    • The Power Moves
    • The Private Man
    • The Red Pill Room
    • The Red Quest
    • The Rules Revisited
    • The Spearhead
    • Troy Francis
    • Wintery Knight
    • Young Man Red Pill
  • Books
  • Dictionary
  • @TRParchive
  • Please help TheRedArchive stay alive

Women must now pay and provide for ill/disabled husbands - Singapore

moistyorifices

March 2, 2016
115 upvotes
/r/MensRights
http://www.todayonline.com/singapore/women-must-now-provide-ill-disabled-husbands-or-ex-husbands
Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB
Share
Share Tweet Reddit Email
Post Information
Title Women must now pay and provide for ill/disabled husbands - Singapore
Author

moistyorifices

Upvotes 115
Comments 14
Date March 2, 2016 12:22 AM UTC
(10 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/48ji4l/women_must_now_pay_and_provide_for_illdisabled/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/women-must-now-pay-and-provide-for-illdisabled.954912
https://theredarchive.com/post/954912

Comments

[–]ThePigmanAgain 15 points16 points17 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

If true, this is a step towards equality which, i am certain, will be welcomed by feminists everywhere.

[–]DrDespolardo 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

you know what, when there will be equal number of men filing lawsuit for alimony, women will protest and then govt will eliminate alimony from constitution.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That is interesting considering I'm from Singapore :P

[–]Leinadro -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I think this is a step in the wrong direction.

[+]mochacola -15 points-14 points-13 points 10 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

I actually think this is very unfair to women. This is not going to affect gold diggers or irresponsible narcissistic behavior in divorce. This will bound women who are willing to marry the class of men in dangerous jobs like mining, soldiers, etc ( men who can't provide luxurious life in the first place ), to be caretaker of their men for life. Granted, that was what's expected of wives two generations ago. But this shift does not affect women lying in family court and denying kids of their dads to extort money. And not having this law doesn't mean she can't if she wanted to. I think it's up to the man's family to help.

[–]lasciate 9 points10 points11 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

This is not going to affect gold diggers or irresponsible narcissistic behavior in divorce.

...women who are willing to marry the class of men in dangerous jobs like[...]soldiers

Do you know anything about Army wives?

[+]mochacola -6 points-5 points-4 points 10 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

I am all for getting rid of alimony and any claim on money awarded to vets. But to ask she financially support her man after the divorce? Isn't that what we are trying to get rid of?

That'll be like saying, now it's very easy for dads to make false claims to alienate moms, and that's one step towards equality.

And god forbid if my brother got into accident and need financial support, I'd think it's my duty, not someone he divorced or somone who divorced him.

Isn't this equivalent to men be held financially responsible if our ex developed cervical cancer?

[–]bufedad 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

This will bound women who are willing to marry the class of men in dangerous jobs like mining, soldiers, etc ( men who can't provide luxurious life in the first place ), to be caretaker of their men for life.

As those men are for their women if they aren't incapacitated?

Oh, the unfairness of it all.

[–]mochacola 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

We are trying to get rid of alimony, are we not? This law, reversed, would be like, despite abolishing alimony, if your ex developed cervical cancer or breast cancer, then, you are bound to pay her medical bills.

[–]bufedad 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

We are trying to get rid of alimony, are we not? This law, reversed, would be like, despite abolishing alimony, if your ex developed cervical cancer or breast cancer, then, you are bound to pay her medical bills.

Did I miss where Alimony miraculously disappeared?

Financial slavery will not end until women are subjected to it.

[–]mochacola 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Say, you are fighting to abolish slavery. Real slavery. Do you consider blacks being able to own whites as slaves as a "step forward" while you are advocating to abolish slavery? Isn't that hypocrisy?

[–]bufedad 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Yep. If I need whites to help stop slavery, the risk of them being slaves brings the end of all slavery that much closer.

[–]mochacola 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

No, we either see it as just, or see it as unjust.

[–]bufedad 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

An oversimplification. It is unjust. That is clear. However, until the privileged group faves this same injustice, it will remain. To achieve our goal, we may first achieve equality.

Browse all authors
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter