Good for you. I'm not sure where the disagreement comes from then. I'm sure that a traditional husband who has provided for his wife their whole lives is not going to suddenly change his mind when he retires. If it's always been "what's mine is yours," I would imagine it would stay that way.
But what of the "stay at home" woman who spends half a lifetime frittering away the hours and spending hubby's paycheck as fast as he can earn it, who then dumps him and gloms half his 401k? Why should the poor schmuck eat dog food because this woman, who has never worked a day in her life, now has a pension he sold his soul for?
In this game, inequity cuts both ways.
Well...really, it should go neither way. If a right to half the assets is extended to a divorcing stay-at-home mom, even though the Mr. made the sacrifices to earn those assets, a right to joint custody should be enforced for the working dad, even if the Mrs. spent more time with them.
The inequity comes in when the first right is enforced, but the second one is not.