British Judge partially corrects the wrongs in alimony law

"This is not a case in which the wife gave up a career that was likely to provide substantial income or monetary reward,"

It is progress but not all that I had hoped, this quote is bad news IMO. It just shows the judge is still willing to enslave the average man if SHE chose not to work.

This is how I see it, a married man gets certain benefits (sex, companionship, love, hopefully happiness) and he pays for those things giving her monetary benefits in addition to her also getting the benefits mentioned above(she is still getting more benefits). So, why is it that when he loses his benefits (usually divorces are initiated by women) she still gets half of her benefits (the monetary ones) at his expense?

Alimony is a crock and BTW, the same applies to child alimony (aka, child support). Fathers lose all their benefits, the lose their influence over their kids, they lose their rights over their kids and they lose a meaningful relationship with thier kids. Mother, on the other hand gets all of those benefits, free money and unimaginable power to control father.

The biggest problem with child alimony is that public pressure is so great that men actually shoot each other in the foot over it, actually helping women to alienate men from their children. Not knowing that this same woman is likely to do it to them in the future!

Like I said though, this is progress just not much.

This woman got almost $26M in cash and assets in the divorce settlement and that wasn't enough! She still wanted alimony on top of that because she gave up a teaching job to care for her children.

A woman's greed at divorce time has absolutely no bounds.

After only a few years of marriage, Heather Mills actually thinks she is entitled to half of all McCartneys money?

I bet he earned most of that before she was even born!!