~ archived since 2018 ~
Popular
Other
TC1851
[–]antifeminist35 points6 points7 points 3 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
Years ago, a wife needed the husband's permission to open a bank account. Feminists stated this was sexist and controlling the woman.
Now, the officially feminist government of Canada has done the same, but with men. The woman does not need anyone's permission to apply for benefits. But if a father is the primary caregiver (even if not living with the woman-divorced and he has custody), the father requires the mother's permission via a letter to obtain the benefit.
The woman now exerts an element of financial control over the father. This shows once again that feminism isn't about equality.
Addendum:
I'm Canadian and wanted to file a federal discrimination complain, but I do not have 'standing' and therefore cannot. If any Canadian guys are the primary caregiver, please do what you need to do to get the benefits and then file a complaint with the Federal (not provincial) Human Rights Commission:
File a complaint with the Canadian Federal Human Rights Commission
[–]hajimodnar9 points10 points11 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Wow. Does not work that way in my house. So I need my wife to sign?
SEXIST
[–]ctwise122 points3 points4 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
After the endless Women’s marches to say that it was sexist that a woman’s husband used to have to giver her permission for things, and this is what they come up with. I’m all for the marches and they mostly were good topics, but man does this look silly
[–]death_ray_mx6 points7 points8 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
second class citizenship
[+]--who-11 points-10 points-9 points 3 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
I don’t see what this has to do with FSW, is this a bait?
[–]NeilDegrasse-PhatAss18 points19 points20 points 3 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
I think it has something to do with the fact that the woman in a heterosexual marriage can apply outright without any express permission from the man, but if the man is the primary caretaker they literally need written permission from the woman/mother saying that they’re the primary caretaker, but I’m as unsure as you are tbh
[–]Donutninja116 points17 points18 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
So let's get this straight. For a man to claim CCB he needs his female partner (wife, gf, etc) to write a letter stating he is (effectively) the legitimate father. But a man will have to pay child support until a child is 18 without requiring evidence that he is the father (and in some cases he clearly is not the father). Makes sense.
[–]CryogenicRookie224 points5 points6 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Yes exactly, unless it’s a gay man in a homosexual couple, apparently they don’t need permission from their partners like men do
[–]TC1851[S] 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Yes exactly. But of course Men are so privileged /s
[–]--who2 points3 points4 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
oh I see it now actually that makes sense why it’s in this sub
© TheRedArchive 2024. All rights reserved.created by /u/dream-hunter
[–]antifeminist35 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]hajimodnar9 points10 points11 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]ctwise122 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]death_ray_mx6 points7 points8 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]--who-11 points-10 points-9 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]NeilDegrasse-PhatAss18 points19 points20 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]Donutninja116 points17 points18 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]CryogenicRookie224 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]TC1851[S] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]--who2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link