Replies

I don't know that it's true that the divorced woman is in such bad shape. A lot of these women have college degrees and careers, finding a job should be no harder than it is on anyone else - a lot easier, in fact, given the resources they acquire from their husbands through divorce.

Men are thoroughly discriminated against when it comes to divorce - via financial rape, and via being completely unable to get custody of one's children unless the ex-wife happens to be in jail.

There are several divorces in my family, in each and every case the husband has been left with nothing except an obligation to make regular monthly payments to his ex-wife. They then get to try and start their lives anew at 40, 50, 60 years of age.

In addition, approximately half of the people I went to school with also had divorced parents. I know of no case, except one (where the mother disappearred completely, without a trace) where events turned out any differently.

Having gotten quite a few up-close looks at divorce and the resulting carnage, I wonder why any woman would stay married rather than cash out with divorcing her husband. I have also noticed, by the way, that a feminist attitude by a married woman is a nearly certain predictor of imminent divorce.

Of course, most men fare badly financially out of divorce. However, that does not refute that the women have >also< fared badly, relative to how they would have fared if they had not been divorced.

Divorced women with custody can find jobs, but have a terrible time gaining advancement, advancement that they could more easily procure if they had the supports and economic benefits of marriage. The "resources" that most women acquire from their husbands on divorce are typically outweighed, on a practical basis, by their accompanying liabilities (the home equity comes along with the mortgage payment, the child support comes along with all the costs of raising and providing for the children).

All of this means that, sentiment aside, you simply cannot say that women are, in any statistically significant sense, motivated to divorce by financial gain.

As for child custody laws can certainly be enforced unfairly. However, the laws, themselves, are pretty straightforward: absent a showing of unfitness, primary physical custody goes to the parent who has had the greatest prior involvement in the child's day to day activities. A father can gain divorce "insurance" by making sure that he matches the time, hour for hour, day for day, that his wife invests in his kids. Or else change the laws to make the basis for primary custody something else.

I am not conviced that the primary physical custody laws are crying out for change. I do think that the visitation laws are susceptible for great abuse, and the courts must be aggressive in revoking the custody of custodial parents who frustrate their ex's weekend, vacation, and special occasion rights.

Sadly, though, many ex-husbands play into the hands of their ex-wives by being unable to control their temper and let their lawyers do their talking for them. It only takes one angry or threatening outburst to get the restraining orders piled on, and months (or years) of supervised visits and mandatory anger management therapy to get the orders modified. Women tend to be irrational in >filing< for divorce -- men tend to be irrational >after< the divorce.