Posted on 06/10/2003 7:35:30 PM PDT by Ethan Clive Osgoode
Ask a buddy at work. Ask your neighbor. Even a relative will probably have heard of one. And the stories are always the same: she took his house, his car, and his kids. She made more money than him and he still had to pay alimony. She accused him of physical abuse and the courts didn't even ask for evidence.
It seems that no matter who you talk to these days, someone knows of a man who came out of a divorce robbed and humiliated. And there is no end to how harrowing such stories get.
In America, men are forced to pay around 40% of their income to ex-wives, regardless of wrongdoing on the woman's parts (often called "no-fault" alimony). She could commit adultery and beat her husband or kids, and none of it will influence the court's decision.
More shockingly still, a woman can simply accuse her husband of sexual or physical abuse (or simply express a fear of it) and instantly win a restraining order forcing him away from his home and children, without so much as a hearing. In fact, most divorce lawyers will advise a woman to do this, and those who do not can be sued for legal malpractice.
And once she has the kids, the family court will be loath to enforce visitation rights for the father. All the mother has to do is ask.
the war on men
With divorce on the rise -- today, more than 50% of all marriages in the U.S. result in divorce -- men's rights are being increasingly overlooked to the benefit of women. Consider this: statistically, the first person to file for divorce usually wins. While 70% of all divorces are initiated by women, 85 to 90% of custody awards go to the women. The numbers alone reveal the ugly truth when it comes to men: marriage has become a gamble in which the odds are heavily against us.
Family courts have become synonymous with tragedy and injustice. Once made to protect women from deadbeat dads, these courts are making a mockery of fairness by being instruments of disgrace for men and families.
But this waking nightmare is simply part of a much larger current. Even the most inattentive of men will notice that the media is saturated with negative images of themselves.
Pervasive in television and movies, the only acceptable representation of man is that of the irresponsible, beer-drinking dimwit. We are living in the anti-male age, where men are the new scapegoats for all of society's evils. It was only a matter of time before this trend reached the courtrooms.
the tables have turned
There is little doubt over who is responsible for this. Radical feminists, the same ones who dominate the media and schools with the message that men are by nature violent and abusive, have gained control of key parts of the law and legislature. They have managed to convince lawmakers that men are dangerous and have no place in a child's life, and therefore should be controlled accordingly. And the result can be seen in the following rulings:
Courts consistently refuse to lower child support fees when the father's income drops. Known as the "Bradley Amendment," this law forbids any reduction in child support arrears, even if the father is disabled.
If a man remarries, his new wife's income can be used as proof that the man can pay alimony. If the ex-wife (and mother) remarries, however, not a cent of her new husband's earnings goes to child support. The court's rationale? They are not his children, thus not his responsibility.
Current data indicates that women are becoming the biggest perpetrators of domestic abuse. Furthermore, many women brainwash children into saying their fathers were abusers. Courts will nonetheless believe a woman over a man, just because she is the mother.
In California, if the higher-earning spouse, who is typically the man, is hurt during marriage and gets a monetary settlement, the court can award some of it to the wife even if he suffered all the pain and permanent loss of earning capacity.
The earning spouse will be ordered to pay the attorney's fees of the dependent spouse, which is usually between $5,000 and $20,000 US, even if the latter initiated it.
the delicate sex?
Conventional wisdom tells us that women are, by nature, nurturers. For that reason they should naturally have custody of a child. Far be it for anyone to question a mother's love, but turning a blind eye to the role that a father plays in a child's life is downright insensitive. A good father keeps a family together, provides strength, and shows unconditional support.
These are not the musings of romantics. U.S. data shows that fatherless children are five times more likely to commit suicide, nine times more likely to drop out of school, 10 times more likely to abuse drugs, and 20 times more likely to end up in prison. Also, 71% of teenage pregnancies happen to girls who reside in fatherless homes.
Now get this: 60% of all child abuse is committed by women with sole custody.
with liberty & justice for some
So why are fathers increasingly discouraged -- nay, maligned -- from being fathers? When a pendulum stops swinging one way, it must necessarily come to the other extreme. This is a fact too oft forgotten by the frontline fighters of feminism. So influential are pressure groups run by seriously vindictive women, that preference in courts are given to women -- no matter what.
Family judges today automatically believe the woman over the man out of fear for being politically incorrect. They know that if they examine the facts and find that the man is more capable of raising a child, the shrill alarms of sexism will ring loud and clear.
keep it in the middle
It is time to admit that the pendulum of political correctness has swung too far. In an effort to force equality into society, all the power fell into the hands of feminists who seem too happy to ape the worst traits of their former oppressors. But pointing fingers is what got us into this mess in the first place. It won't help anyone, and it will only prod us to the other extreme. Of greater consequence is that marriage vows are now seven-year contracts that end in tears and anger. It might be wise to examine where we went wrong.
And should we try to change the pendulum's course, let's hope we learn to keep it happily in the middle.
On the other side, I've seen a woman getting screwed over by her soon-to-be ex-husband. He cheated on her and started hiding money as he made his plans to leave her. He started reducing his salary so as (he hopes anyway) not to have to pay her as much alimony and child support as he should. She put him through college working 2 jobs and now he's the big wage earner, trying to leave her and their child high and dry.
Dad refused to pay child support, moved out of state. Gave us $25 on our b-day, and for x-mas, and called maybe 5 times a year, took us every other summer for 2 weeks. Mom worked 3 jobs to put us in private school.
Some guys are complete a-holes. My dad is one of them. He quit drinking after my mom booted him out, then 4 years later proceded to knock a woman up, and of course refused to accept any responsibility, financial, emotional or otherwise. No booze to blame this time.
I am not going to be holding a pity party for him next Sunday. Yes some guys get amazingly screwed by the system. Some others though, get off way too easy.
It has to be hard, but the kids are great - even when they act like nipple heads.
LVM
I have the opposite view you do - the women are the ones acting the part of the whore - and the men pay for it. Being in the military, they are screwed beyond belief.
LVM
Why? Because men know it is a very ugly fight and the odds are stacked way against them .... so most of them just leave because they believe they can't win.
i think you are being a little unfair.
i agree with you that generally it is women more than men who raise children (whether single, married, or divorced), but everyone's story is different. does not being at the well baby clinic denote a lack of interest in the child, or does it just reflect a very common division of labor choice?
also, i can understand child support payments, but i have never understood alimony - it seems like a throwback to pre equal rights days. the whole concept of alimony seems really insulting and i can't see why any woman would seek or accept it.
what do you think?
The article shows us the answer is usually no. Talk about your marriage penalty!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.