UK: Men are becoming 'disadvantaged group'

Implications. Hmm, let's see, what's the drill here?

He graduates from college. She may or may not have gone also but because he can get a decent job, she "chooses" to stay at home and "chooses" to have 2.5 kids while he goes to work daily to finance her choices. (Which were also his choices, too-- and I'm still amazed that so many men are still falling for this particular form of Shanghai-ing.) She turns 30 and decides she's sick of him and divorces him. She's been the "primary caregiver" and so gets the house, "primary residence" in the "joint custody" arrangement and thus she gets child support and alimony. Out of his $50k/yr income he now gets to keep abt $20k of it since he's also still paying for the house he no longer lives in. Did I forget to mention she also gets half his 401k, etc., too?

Well with men not going to college like they used to, this means fewer of them to be in a place where they can be so suckered. If the fish doesn't even have teeth, he can't bite at the hook, can he?

Must really annoy the kind of woman who is looking for a sperm- and money-supplier. How about this for an idea: Finance your own damned reproductive agenda.

But there is another "implication" we ought to consider: As the educational attainment level of men in general rises, so generally do the fortunes of that society. What follows is a drop in crime, an increase in innovation and industriousness, and an overall rise in prosperity. When the educational levels of men go into decline, the exact opposite happens. Women's educational attainment level doesn't affect these barometers to nearly the same degree. Does that mean it's less important for individual women? Not at all. But does it mean that discarding the pursuit of educational attainment for men as society has been doing these past 30 years supposedly for the sake of propelling women into higher education has been a swimmingly great idea for society in an overall sense?

Wouldn't say so. If anything, we should have been pursuing the attainment of truly equal educational attainment for both sexes. But that isn't very feminist, is it?

I know it is common talk among mens rights groups about how the divorcing wife makes out like a bandit, but if you hang around and listen to divorced women talk, they paint a much different scenario.

I personally don't know any divorced women who made out like described above. Alimony is not that common unless it was a long marriage and the husband was extremely wealthy. Most wives that were stay at home moms before divorce have to go back to work. The majority of all divorces are settled between the two spouses and do not go to trial.

If any spouses are lucky enough to stay in the house after divorce they have to buy the house during the divorce (the phrase "she got the house" usually means that she had an option to buy out his share of the equity - this is a benefit to both spouses, the alternative would be to sell it and each spouse would have to deduct the sale's commission). If the home was obtained during the marriage the house value is split 50/50 just like all marital assets (in community property states). Most debt is also split 50/50, unless the borrowed money was solely for a the benefit of one spouse. Also most mortgage contracts state that the person(s) responsible for the mortgage must be living in the house (hence "primary residence"). Banks just don't go around changing terms of the mortgage contract and divorce courts have no jurisdiction over private contracts, which is why mortgaged property is refinanced during or after divorce to the person responsible for payment.

The average divorced mothers I know who's exes make about $100K received about $700-$1000 month in child support for 2-3 kids and work full time themselves. The wives who worked before the divorce were given the option to buy their spouse out of the house (or the husband bought them out). The wives, I know who were stay at home moms before the divorce went into nursing school as they usually qualified for some type of government sponsored education, as they were now living below the poverty line and had to be in the workforce within a certain number of years. Typically if a house was owned before the divorce in one-income family, it was sold as neither spouse could afford it on their own.

Divorce is tough on both spouses and typically both live at a lower standard then before the divorce.

My discussion was around a scenario where the mrs. stayed at home during the day, not going out to work but staying at home and taking care of kids. *That's* the scenario that was typical before the Divorce Boom. When it hit, men got taken to the cleaners and in scenarios where they still follow the "traditional model" as I described, they still get shafted, often exactly as I described. Buy her husband out of half the house? If she has not been making $, then with what? As you said, perhaps if you live in a state where the judge can't (or won't) award her the house, what happens? The house, which dad's been paying for all this time, gets sold and she gets half the proceeds. Add that to her take of alimony (yes, it still gets awarded) and child support and... not too bad, all in exchange for staying at home for years and raising kids which she most likely wanted more than dad and will get to keep (as dad pays for them and inevitably becomes less involved with since they live w/ her and not him).

But as you said, divorce is rough on everyone involved and indeed, it is. So if it's really so bad for women, then why do so many keep seeking out husbands? The behavior and the rhetoric just don't match up. The answer's simple: As deals go, women usually make out either way, staying married or getting a divorce. You can argue marginal cases, sure, but the overall trend reveals society's biases and injustices around this topic pretty clearly.

"I know it is common talk among mens rights groups about how the divorcing wife makes out like a bandit"

My understanding is that, the claim women make out like bandits is a comparative assertion. She makes out like a bandit in comparison to what his share is. This is particularly true when they are granted primary/sole custody of children, because courts tend to try and assure the child's standard of living is impacted as little as possible. You also need to do a comparative of pre-marriage, not post marriage. Does she come out of the marriage better of than she went in? I'd argue, more often than not, she does, where the guy does not.

As to average child payments, again, it is my understanding that the payment guidelines put a 2 child father as paying 20-35% of his annual gross income, depending on the state/province. My mothers husband was making $70k/y and was paying $780 per month, and that was for one child. He was required to continue paying that when he became unemployed, and it took two years for him to get a downward modification (having to pay the full amount the whole time) when his next job only paid $60K/y

Another stat that bothers me is that of divorced mothers living bellow the poverty line. To my knowledge, those stats don't examine the mothers income (nor the fathers) with child support factored in. Child support can take a big chunk off a payers take-home pay, and can do a lot to raise a payee above th poverty line. Your own rather low figures still provides $8-12K/year, assuming alimony doesn't go with it. Seriously, even a meanial job pays enough to push someone with that kind of TAX FREE boost above the poverty line.

I wont go on and on, as we will continue to disagree. I am sure we all have antidotal stories and personal experiences we can recall.

I personally don't see any evidence of divorce settlements as described above by Matt and it does not line up with statistics or legal policies in formulating child support.

If you hang around MRA sites you will hear about how most men get taken to the cleaners while ex-wives live the high life. If you hang around divorced mothers you will hear about how they are unable to collect child support and are unable to meet the financial needs of the children while ex- hubby goes on vacation or works under the table.

From the stats I am reading about 25% of single mothers are on welfare, so it is not the majority, and child support received from the father is factored into any qualification for welfare benefits. I understand that each type of welfare benefit is assigned a dollar amount and factored in before a person qualifies for another type of benefit.