We fought for equality. So why do greedy wives still sponge off their ex-husbands?

TracyMorganFreeman · 2013-05-09T03:40:21+00:00

Because we let them. Who wouldn't take advantage of that situation?

We also feed a sense of entitlement other people's labor as well, some of which is justified some not, but nonetheless applied broadly.

geengaween · 2013-05-09T02:53:22+00:00

Something tells me this issue doesn't rate very highly on the feminist agenda.

namae_nanka · 2013-05-09T03:05:29+00:00

daniel amneus wrote of this about betty friedan, original she claimed that society asked too little of women, once women started getting divorced without enough alimony, she changed her tune.

"Betty Friedan’s complaint in the sixties was that society asked so little of women. It asks far more of men, as men’s seven year shorter life expectancy proves. The pretense made in the 60s was that feminism would “liberate men too” from being breadwinning drudges and payers of alimony: “Man is not the enemy,” said Ms. Friedan, “but the fellow victim of the bind of half-equality we are in now…. I see so clearly and hear from the mouths of men how they also are sensing that they are going to be freed to greater self-fulfillment as human beings as we women are released from the binds that now constrain us from full development of our own human potential.”"

"Bullfeathers, Betty. A generation and a half has rolled by and we have now become the society you wished for—with messed-up females breeding illegitimate and messed-up children living in feminized poverty.
And unsocialized males wondering bewilderedly what their role is supposed to be now that marriage confronts them with a sixty percent probability of divorce—with the same support obligations which you promised to liberate them from—still the exploited breadwinners but without the satisfactions of family living that made male labor meaningful in their grandfathers’ day."

I_fight_demons · 2013-05-09T05:09:00+00:00

Now this is feminism I can get behind. Phenomenal article and its more provocative in that she has put her money where her mouth is:

‘Maintenance?’ I asked in surprise. When we divorced, no lawyers were involved, and we did a 50/50 split with no further financial obligations on either side. It was a fair division and reflected what each had put into the relationship.

I still found myself slightly uncomfortable with the narrative that ruinous settlements are humiliating to women since there wasn't a lot of explicit mention that this is brutal financial abuse towards men or that men suffer sexism. She did have a few nods to this with phrase like:

The cruellest trick of all? ... an ex-wife can come back and demand more...

or

I know of countless men who have fallen foul of greedy ex-wives who seem determined to see the men they married reduced to penury.

I would have liked to to solidly frame the issue as 'men also suffer from oppression' a bit more. Perhaps I'm just being gun-shy. I've read far too much empty 'feminism fixes men's issues as well!' rhetoric, and I've read far too many instances where issues that hurt everyone have the female portion emphasized and the male burden ignored or redefined into further female pain (Hilary Clinton's "Women have always been the primary victims of war. Women lose their husbands, their fathers, their sons in combat." anyone?) Despite this, it's a stunning piece and is a gold standard exhibit about how feminism could actually fix issues that harm males.

I was also just a touch put off by the narrative that 'women all ought to make money just like men.' Yes, that should be a choice any woman can make, but it shouldn't be an enforced choice. Having a non-working subset of the population that maintains domestic life and raises children is an incredibly successful social construct. It works wonders when enacted properly. We shouldn't encourage everyone to abandon home-making and child rearing because it is an incredible social boon. What we do need to do is ensure that neither home-making nor entering the work force is gender policed.

Crimson_D82 · 2013-05-09T07:15:48+00:00

There's no reason to men to engage in legal marriages in this day and age. Get a spiritual marriage, nothing legal.

johnsmith66 · 2013-05-09T05:11:13+00:00

Feminists fought for equity, not equality, and there is an enormous difference between these two concepts,

Disorderly-Conduct · 2013-05-09T06:18:24+00:00

I keep hearing how the Daily Mail is a trashy tabloid, but they always seem to unabashedly cover gender issues without a gender feminist slant like this. Anyone else have an opinion on this site?

Heterohabilis · 2013-05-09T10:35:51+00:00

Why do dogs lick their balls?

Because they can.

JustPlainGross · 2013-05-09T15:27:48+00:00

I can name 3 guys right off the top of my head who have been paying alimony longer than they were actually married.

These outdated laws stem from the 50s when I'll readily admit women needed them after a divorce. Isn't like that any more yet no one has had the political balls to challenge them.

Abbrevi8 · 2013-05-09T07:12:50+00:00

Because they can.

2013-05-09T20:44:44+00:00

Simple, because feminists never fought for equality. They fought for cookies from the cookie jar with no chores attached. Feminism has only strengthened traditional gender roles by painting women as helpless, pathetic victims who can only rely on government assistance to succeed.

McFeely_Smackup · 2013-05-09T21:53:02+00:00

I know there are many cases where men have been the villains, having secret mistresses or have gambled or drunk away family funds. Rightly, they should pay for their misdeeds.

It's funny that even in an article where she is TRYING to be reasonable, and not be a member of the greedy ex-wives club, she still couldn't hold back from admitting that revenge money is ok if the woman is REALLY mad.

Treevooor · 2013-05-10T03:08:02+00:00

My extremely liberal and feminist teacher constantly blabbers on about how women are constantly being controlled, undermined, and treated poorly by men. In the same lesson, she will mention that her daughters attend some of the most highly esteemed universities in the country. The irony enters in when she says that her extremely wealthy ex-husband pays for the entirity of their education that is not covered by scholarships. Even better, her current husband makes a fair sum of money (this is an understatement), well into six figures. They live in an area of the country with below average living expenses.

Raudskeggr · 2013-05-09T08:21:04+00:00

Gentlemen, gentlemen. This is why god invented the pre-nup.

Friends don't let friends marry without one.

Title	We fought for equality. So why do greedy wives still sponge off their ex-husbands?
Author	ycombinator
Upvotes	102
Comments	39
Date	May 9, 2013 12:50 AM UTC (13 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/mensrights/comments/1dyxtk/we-fought-for-equality-so-why-do-greedy-wives-/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/we-fought-for-equality-so-why-do-greedy-wives.1612322 https://theredarchive.com/post/1612322

Comments