3 ms·
> What gets paid to support children is called child support, not alimony. In most jurisdictions, child support is more than the cost of raising a child. In C
by adekok 9y ago
> What gets paid to support children is called child support, not alimony.
In most jurisdictions, child support is more than the cost of raising a child. In Canada, equalizing incomes was the goal of the latest round of child support guidelines, not "support for the child".
For a US reference, see http://www.divorcecorp.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/The-Economic-Cost-of-Raising-Children_William-Comanor.pdf http://www.divorcecorp.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/The-Ec...
> I spent two decades supporting my husband's career. When we divorced, he still had a well paid job and twenty years work experience. I was starting over from scratch and was "lucky" to get a better-than-minimum-wage job to start.
And you should get compensated for that. The question is really how much, and how long.
> It aggravates me that the world as a whole acts like having kids and raising them is only a financial cost to men.
In some sense, it is. See research on the wage gap going back to the 1960's. Never-married childless women earn about the same as never-married childless men.
Once people get married and have kids, men take on additional work to pay for their kids. Women take on less work to take care of their kids.
This means men have higher "out of pocket" costs than women do. But women pay the "opportunity cost" of raising kids. Hence alimony.
> if you just don't want children at all, there are several viable solutions:
None of those are truly viable. They're necessary conditions to not having kids. But not sufficient.
In practice, a women can name any man as the father if she wants. No paternity test is necessary in most jurisdictions, and such tests are illegal in parts of Europe! In some states, if the father is notified of such a child and doesn't contest it within 30 days, he's determined to be the father, and has no right to fight it after that.
See any number of cases where men are paying for kids they didn't even know existed, who DNA proves aren't theirs.
The guy doesn't even have to have sex with her. If your girlfriend's room-mate sneaks into the room at night, grabs the used condom, and impregnates herself, well, as the man, you pay for 18 years. No choice, or you go to jail.
> That whole "sleeping with me will destroy your entire future" vibe is a distinct turn off for me.
As it is for men. The reality is that women hold essentially all control over reproduction. Women can choose to get pregnant, and can force any man to pay for their choices, for the next 18 years. At the threat of jail, losing jobs, passport, drivers license, etc.
It is entirely rational to be wary of such side-effects.
The point here is that while your choices have cost you, men don't have some magical happy land of money, cigars, whisky, and bro-hugs. There are costs and benefits to the choices made by both sexes.
- Mz 9y agoOnce people get married and have kids, men take on additional work to pay for their kids. Women take on less work to take care of their kids. Women take on more work too, it is just not paid work. Mothers, whether they have a paid job or not, tend to be chronically short of sleep. Full time moms spend about 60 hours per week on household chores. Working moms spend about 40 hours per week. I am aware that there are two sides to this story and men have their own concerns. But, the open hostility towards women you are displaying is something I felt a need to give a little pushback to. This is an overwhelmingly male forum. Such comments are often wildly upvoted and cheered on. It does not help bridge the gap. It just deepens the "war of the sexes." But, I should probably disengage. Your pattern of comments here looks pretty toxic to me. Probably no good will come of engaging you further.
- adekok 9y ago> Women take on more work too, it is just not paid work Well, yes. I did say "take care of their kids". As for paid vs unpaid work, see:: http://stats.oecd.org/index.aspx?queryid=54757 http://stats.oecd.org/index.aspx?queryid=54757 In most western countries, men and women do roughly the same amount of total work. For men, more paid than unpaid. For women, the other way around. So again, just focussing on "women have it bad" misses a big part of the picture. > I am aware that there are two sides to this story and men have their own concerns Apparently not. > But, the open hostility towards women you are displaying ... is a self-serving lie. > Your pattern of comments here looks pretty toxic to me I acknowledge your position, agree that you deserve alimony, express caution that showing one side of the picture isn't a good approach, and show how the choices men and women make each have their pros and cons. You show one side of the story, and express shock and outrage that someone dare bring up the other side. And then you call me hostile and toxic? Please, that's just pathetic.
- Mz 9y ago> Women take on more work too, it is just not paid work Well, yes. I did say "take care of their kids". This is what you originally said: Once people get married and have kids, men take on additional work to pay for their kids. Women take on less work to take care of their kids. You did not say that women do less paid work. You said they take on less work. This framing implicitly suggests that women's work isn't really work. This seems to be a common societal default assumption and that deeply held belief helps drive the feminization of poverty because the mental model is that women's work isn't real work and doesn't really deserve compensation. The rest of your comment is simply gratuitously ugly, so I am done here.