Is it hamstering?

salami_inferno · 2013-12-19T14:04:02+00:00

I'm not sure I understand what you're talking about, but here it goes...

I think the problem most opponents of alimony have is that women initiate most divorces and receive most alimony. This can make it appear like at least some are cashing out at the expense of the guy.

[deleted] · 2013-12-21T21:30:46+00:00

I find it interesting that the people who seem to want to bring back patriarchy are the ones who fight the idea of alimony that favors the wife. These laws were first put into place to protect women from divorce because at the time women were considered unable to live life in their own and were basically legal dependents throughout their lives. You may find it interesting to look up "coverture".

Coverture was brought to the US from British common law and stated that a husband and wife were one person as far as the law was concerned (and that person was the husband). A married woman could not own property, sign legal documents or enter into a contract, obtain an education against her husband's wishes, or keep a salary for herself. If a wife was permitted to work, under the laws of coverture she was required to relinquish her wages to her husband. In certain cases, a wife did not have individual legal liability for her misdeeds, since it was legally assumed that she was acting under the orders of her husband, and generally a husband and a wife were not allowed to testify either for or against each other.

It wasn't until the late 19th century that many states passed Married Women's Property Acts to eliminate or reduce the effects of coverture, and it wasn't until 1920 that women could vote, but things do seem to be getting better.

Traditionally, alimony was always paid by a husband to his former wife, but since the 1970s there have been moves in many Western countries towards gender equality with a corresponding recognition that a former husband may also be entitled to alimony from his former wife.

Whenever there are big society changes, some people will hate it. Things just aren't the way they used to be. I get that and sympathize with that. Some people want to bring back some things but not others. Just look at music companies, they're making more money than ever before but they want things to go back to the way things used to be, because even with all the opportunity, a constantly changing landscape is scary and unpredictable.

We're all living in a confusing world so I believe it's normal for people to try to examine what's really going on. Everyone is going to see a little piece of the painting. The truth is no one has a full picture of what's really going on.

I believe many of the unfair laws against men are the direct result of people in the past trying to protect women since they had basically no way to live after being divorced (in a total patriarchy like it was before). That's all changing now. I believe we've made steps to correct these old and unfair laws, but social movements that try to move society back to a patriarchy may undermine all the progress we've made.

tl;dr: When people feel like they've been slighted, it's hard for them to see how their own actions may have contributed to their problems, or how they could be causing similar problems for someone else. This is something all people do. It's human nature. I believe it happens even more in times of huge social change, like right now.

myfriendscantknow · 2013-12-19T15:50:28+00:00

I'm blue pill and I don't entirely understand your question, but you should know that in most cases I'm against alimony as well. I think many if not most feminists are against alimony.

logggggggggg · 2013-12-19T16:17:57+00:00

(OP here, F if i remember the password. ) So I was referencing the attitude that doing things with a woman (person) which things you believe are detrimental to her wellbeing, which you think she will probably regret in the future and pay the price, is not immoral at all since she consented to everything. How does that jive with denouncing women taking advantage of alimony as immoral? After all the men consented to marriage. danabanana9 answers that.

fizolof · 2013-12-19T15:42:02+00:00

First, I don't think there's any clause that says alimony laws only apply to relationships that started before the passing of the law, so the argument that these laws only apply to you if you volunteer to it isn't exactly true.

Second, I don't think most redpillers disagree with alimony laws in principle - they just disagree with those applications which are in some way unfair to men.

Third, I don't get what you mean by "excusing fucking women over as 'amoral'". As far as I know, it is said that the theory is amoral - for example, discussing tools to kill people isn't necessarily evil, unlike killing someone. Similarly, discussing how to attract a woman is amoral, but it can be different with how you use that knowledge.

And besides, I believe the word was "hypocrisy".

ChlorideFloss · 2013-12-19T16:48:21+00:00

How is financially supporting a woman who gave up her career to be a mother and a wife at all related to teh TRP ideals of manipulating girls into having drunken sex and then denying them a relationship?

I don't understand the relevance of this question, you are comparing two very different things - compensation and manipulation.

Marriage is outside of TRP for a reason - it's a coherent legal document. It's not something you can con your way out of so easily.

[deleted] · 2013-12-25T23:31:35+00:00

[permanently deleted]

Tway_the_Parley · 2013-12-19T13:05:34+00:00

No, because fucking men over is 'amoral' too, ~~while alimony laws target men disproportionately.~~

nicethingyoucanthave · 2013-12-19T13:52:34+00:00

fucking women over

What are you talking about?

Title	Is it hamstering?
Author	Loginorelse
Upvotes	5
Comments	22
Date	December 19, 2013 9:21 AM UTC (12 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/PurplePillDebate
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/1t8jp3/is_it_hamstering/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/PurplePillDebate/is-it-hamstering.286470 https://theredarchive.com/post/286470

Comments