Partner SitesHis Side with Glenn Sacks is a nationally syndicated talk radio show devoted to men's and father's rights. Glenn Sacks discusses gender issues from the male perspective. Special Thanks To...The following organizations were early supporters of Mensactivism.org, and we thank them for their support. If you'd like to trade links with us, see our Mensactivism.org supporters page.
|
Till Death, or 20 Years, Do Us PartArticle here. Excerpt: 'Last year, several lawmakers in Mexico City proposed the creation of short-term, renewable marriage contracts with terms as brief as two years. The idea was to own up to the reality that marriages fail about half the time. Is marriage headed for an overhaul? A fundamental rethinking? Is it due for one? When the Mexican legislators proposed their idea, which was not passed, the archdiocese there called it “absurd” and said it was anathema to the nature of marriage. I decided to put the questions to a different group: the people who study marriage and divorce. I was motivated not just by trend lines but, as a child of divorce, by ghosts. One key, he said, would be figuring out a formula for predetermining alimony, given the extent to which money becomes a proxy for bitterness during divorce. That could be solved, he said, through something like tables that show what payments each spouse would make based on his or her eventual income in Year 20. “So perhaps we need to change our expectations so we’re not so unhappy,” he said.'
|
New User AccountsDue to problems with user accounts being used for spam, we require all new user account requests to be sent via email to newaccounts@mensactivism.org. Please let us know what username you would like in your email. Thanks for your patience while we look for a more permanent resolution to our spam problems. User loginFollow Us on TwitterDonationsClick on the icon below to make a donation to Mensactivism.org using PayPal, the most popular on-line payment system. Donations are what keeps this site running, and are only used for this purpose. For more info, or to send a donation by mail, see our Donations Page. Spread the word...We encourage everyone to feel free to further distribute the information found on our site, and we only ask that you help to spread the word about Mensactivism.org in the process: so please, say you saw it on Mensactivism.org! Thank You! |
Comments
How 'bout no alimony at all, Mr. Altshuler
Try this instead: Parties maintain separate financial accounts, agree on %ages of contributions to joint expenses based on income or expected income-- bad things like a lay-off can happen, as we know. What to do in the event of that sort of thing, or a spouse who is faithless economically to the contract, can also be handled by the agreement. If people want a "traditional marriage", then fine-- but it has to be stipulated in the marriage contract and worked out ahead of time how much the "non-working spouse" will get, if anything, should there be a divorce, or at the end of the contract. Also, what constitutes divorce grounds should also be laid out clearly, and standards of proof also delineated. The burden of proof would be on the divorcing spouse, just as in any contract where the violated party has to show how the contract was not fulfilled and in what way.
In essence, a renewable contract that has a number of years and clear responsibilities laid out in it is what is needed, and it has to be treated like any other contract rather than like how it's treated now-- ie, a vehicle for nymphotropism. The current state of affairs leaves the whole thing in the hands of the gov't and it is then handled post facto-- what other legal contract has stipulations for termination so malleably interpretable after the fact, I ask you? A contract to buy a house, which people usually don't own for more than 10 years, stipulates the parties' duties and obligations in the sale ahead of time, requiring truly extraordinary circumstances to get any kind of civil ruling altering the terms or changing their force and effect. Amazing the same thing isn't true with marriage. Amazing there isn't already a way to get a time-limited legal marriage, as well.
People have to get their collective heads out of their collective arses and see that we are living in the 21st century. Times have certainly changed and going back to the 1950s is NOT an option. It's about time the whole "M Word Thing" got brought up to date to keep with the times, otherwise it will well and truly be relegated to the dustbin of history as more and more people just don't see the reason for it or wisdom in doing it.