Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Accountability

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Rog
    replied
    RE: Accountability

    Originally posted by LiliM
    Originally posted by Rog
    Originally posted by LiliM
    While being at home with the kids is a blessing, I personally enjoy working. I am glad I stayed home with them, because they deserved a parent at home. Had I the more lucrative career, DH would have stayed home. It was just a matter of numbers.

    The problem with staying home is that once you are out of the work force for a time, your absence is suspect. I have friends who were UE for over a year (men and women) who had to explain that year gap on their resumes. The job force does not like absences.

    So a short term period of alimony to help the person, male or female, get back on their feet and become meshed into the working world again, if they are not working at the time of divorce, I get.

    But this lifetime shit? Are you fucking kidding me? It's bullshit.

    There needs to be a cap on it, and it needs to stop for ALL recipients at some point, sooner rather than later. I hate the idea that women seem to feel that they are entitled to be paid for having been married and spat out a few kids at some point in their lives.

    Hate to be a bitch, but sheep spit out lotsa kids - it's not rocket science, and most humans do it fairly easily.

    Like most things that were designed to be fair - the person ponying up for the "fair" gets the no vaseline bend over.

    MA awards alimony for life to women married less than 5 years. No wonder DHs ex wants to get married there. Greedy cunt.

    To the argument that a woman's payment for staying home is being with the family - that's true, but the harsh reality is that Joe Employer does not give a fuck about how rewarding it was. Joe Employer wants to know if your skills have gone to shit, can you be counted on to be there, how much training will they have to do to catch you up to speed, and can you even be caught up with having say, 5 years out of your field.

    I took a year off when my second kid was born, and I had to do some CEUs and brush up when I got back to working (I worked out of my house for a number of years). There is a financial cost to being out of the profession.

    So to give the spouse, man or woman, a grace period to get themselves back into the working world, with training to get them up to date on the goings on in their field - that is what alimony should be used for.

    If a spouse is working, then no alimony should be awarded. CS is already used to level the financial playing field in the homes (which is bullshit to me as well, but that's a separate post), there's no need to add alimony on top of it.
    short term alimony has been abused into lifetime alimony
    do you recognize that you gained something from staying home with your kids?(it looks like you do) can it be taken away from you? can the man get back what he missed? then why should he have to pay a woman for this gain and lose out himself at the same time? women should accept that they give up career for family BEFORE they decide to go for family and not use men as slave labor to support them when they choose to leave the relationship and go back to work,, because you know what? the man isnt going to get back all the years his spouse got to stay home and bond with their kids (i still cant believe nobody places more than a passing value on this)

    child support laws have been abused to the point where its standard fare for a woman to "find a donor" and force him to pay, when they were originally supposed to be for i believe not excluding life insurance for children whos fathers wernt married to the mother
    if a law is put in place that has loopholes and financial gain you will find people will make it standard practice to justify those gains..this link refers to the courts holding men responsible for their actions within months of excusing women from them in Roe vs Wade
    http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/hardtruth/roevswades.htm
    I am with you on the CS. My DH was fortunate that he didn't get totally raped from the CS calc...but he made less than the ex, and paid out the ass regardless. The main thing that saved him was that she never requested a mod since she was hiding income as fast as she cashed her CS check, LOL. So i really have no major beef with CS personally - although having seen it abused with so many of my friends, I have major issues with it overall.

    Don't get me started on the "Oops, I'm preggo, I'm keepin it, hand over your money and fuck you on seeing the kid". I think men should have an opt out, just like women do. Forcing someone to be responsible for a decision made by one is not fair. It's what contributes to all these kids growing up with absent dads, and angry moms, and lots of issues. Dad didn't make the choice for the kid to be there in the first place, and mom may be being a bitch...what's to be involved for? I see enough women who feel that since he doesn't pay [undefined=undefined]enough[/undefined], and doesn't jump to her idea of stellar parenting, the PAS and dismissal of dad is rampant. I call it the Newerer Betterer Daddee syndrome. He better not stop that check, though! Gah. Gotta stop, this is a soapbox for me.

    As for alimony, DH and I have discussed this. As a second marriage, with a bitch ex, our stats for success were not high. So after kids, we talked about how we would handle divorce, should it occur (it's not a worry, but we are both realistic). He had no issues with alimony. While he missed out on time with the kids, because I was there, I recorded tons of stuff a daycare provider would not have, was able to share all the little things I knew he would be interested in. Since we have a special needs kid, shit, that first year of DX I would have been fired, I was up at the school so much. He agreed that a year of alimony to help me, were I not working, was fair. Now, it would not be. I am working outside the home. If both parties are making income, alimony is not appropriate.

    We had two choices when we had kids. One was to put the kids into care, thus having both of us miss out. The other was to have one of us give up the career for a time to be there for the kids. Since he made more, that person was me. He has no issue helping me out if needed because my career did take a hit for something that WE decided was best for our family. I was the one who got to make the sacrifice. In the end, I usually do for his career. That was part of our agreement also. So if I needed a year of alimony, he wouldn't begrudge that. Our daycare would have been lots more expensive than a year of alimony, with two small kids, one an infant, LOL. Daycare is a total racket, and you still don't pay what a good provider is truly worth.

    It goes back to the idea that women feel they are "owed" something for having a kid and deigning to be married.

    Whatever. I gained by marrying. So did DH. To us, for us, alimony and CS are compromises. Both of us love the kids, and would love to be with them. Reality is though, my career had more flexibility, and still does. So I take the kid hits via work.

    What I think is interesting is that when a man gets palimony women are outraged. If his spouse made more, and he took the hits career wise for the kids, he deserves it to get back on his feet via his career.

    It just needs to have a stop date. Not easy, when you have states like MA that award it for life.

    Oh! And yes, I totally am glad I stayed home. I would much rather have worked, as I am not truly in love with being a SAHM, but our kids and our family benefited. Life is more chaotic now that both of us work. We believe in being home until school though, because we both had that growing up. I wouldn't trade it for anything. Perhaps would have invested in more wine, though....LOL.
    most of this even i would agree to
    because you BOTH agreed to it ahead of time
    i would never say that having a parent stay at home is a bad choice when its spent properly (i know many women who are SAHM because they want to home school knowing what the schools are like for their boys, and this above all is valued by me when it comes to moms who stay at home)
    and you noted that you made notes of your day? ok yes if i was that dad and i had stuff like that to come home to and felt included in the family i was breaking myself for?holy shit thats a different attitude than the one im used to seeing from women.

    im certain(yes only my opinion)that given reasonable choices about alimony and child support most of the dads who were included the way you include your DH would step up and fulfill their responsibilities as any normal human being would, but when the crazy entitlement is being taught to be strong in todays women the way that it currently is how is a normal man supposed to trust any woman to be moral and sane when its time to split up??
    you said yourself that moral fraud and entitlement runs rampant in the women you know or at least you see it enough to know that its there,, let me tell you something tho many women accept this from other women because they are the same way and at the same time women are experts at hiding this from men.

    but my real question is when will the Government take action to enforce agreements made by women who decided to step up in the first place?
    pre co habitation agreement enforcement?
    pre child support agreement? why is it that in the best interests of the child only applies to men and isnt a universally enforceable thing?

    recognize that you got something from staying at home is good but you should also recognize that your DH worked all that much harder to provide for you not working AND the child you ultimately made the decision yourself to have, since men dont get a say at all in that legally,, that you and he worked out something agreeable is absolutely great but i dont have the opinion its something women are entitled to at all unless agreed to ahead of time as equals(not possible with the current laws in place forcing otherwise and men having 0 say in it)

    Leave a comment:


  • LiliM
    replied
    RE: Accountability

    Originally posted by Rog
    Originally posted by LiliM
    While being at home with the kids is a blessing, I personally enjoy working. I am glad I stayed home with them, because they deserved a parent at home. Had I the more lucrative career, DH would have stayed home. It was just a matter of numbers.

    The problem with staying home is that once you are out of the work force for a time, your absence is suspect. I have friends who were UE for over a year (men and women) who had to explain that year gap on their resumes. The job force does not like absences.

    So a short term period of alimony to help the person, male or female, get back on their feet and become meshed into the working world again, if they are not working at the time of divorce, I get.

    But this lifetime shit? Are you fucking kidding me? It's bullshit.

    There needs to be a cap on it, and it needs to stop for ALL recipients at some point, sooner rather than later. I hate the idea that women seem to feel that they are entitled to be paid for having been married and spat out a few kids at some point in their lives.

    Hate to be a bitch, but sheep spit out lotsa kids - it's not rocket science, and most humans do it fairly easily.

    Like most things that were designed to be fair - the person ponying up for the "fair" gets the no vaseline bend over.

    MA awards alimony for life to women married less than 5 years. No wonder DHs ex wants to get married there. Greedy cunt.

    To the argument that a woman's payment for staying home is being with the family - that's true, but the harsh reality is that Joe Employer does not give a fuck about how rewarding it was. Joe Employer wants to know if your skills have gone to shit, can you be counted on to be there, how much training will they have to do to catch you up to speed, and can you even be caught up with having say, 5 years out of your field.

    I took a year off when my second kid was born, and I had to do some CEUs and brush up when I got back to working (I worked out of my house for a number of years). There is a financial cost to being out of the profession.

    So to give the spouse, man or woman, a grace period to get themselves back into the working world, with training to get them up to date on the goings on in their field - that is what alimony should be used for.

    If a spouse is working, then no alimony should be awarded. CS is already used to level the financial playing field in the homes (which is bullshit to me as well, but that's a separate post), there's no need to add alimony on top of it.
    short term alimony has been abused into lifetime alimony
    do you recognize that you gained something from staying home with your kids?(it looks like you do) can it be taken away from you? can the man get back what he missed? then why should he have to pay a woman for this gain and lose out himself at the same time? women should accept that they give up career for family BEFORE they decide to go for family and not use men as slave labor to support them when they choose to leave the relationship and go back to work,, because you know what? the man isnt going to get back all the years his spouse got to stay home and bond with their kids (i still cant believe nobody places more than a passing value on this)

    child support laws have been abused to the point where its standard fare for a woman to "find a donor" and force him to pay, when they were originally supposed to be for i believe not excluding life insurance for children whos fathers wernt married to the mother
    if a law is put in place that has loopholes and financial gain you will find people will make it standard practice to justify those gains..this link refers to the courts holding men responsible for their actions within months of excusing women from them in Roe vs Wade
    http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/hardtruth/roevswades.htm
    I am with you on the CS. My DH was fortunate that he didn't get totally raped from the CS calc...but he made less than the ex, and paid out the ass regardless. The main thing that saved him was that she never requested a mod since she was hiding income as fast as she cashed her CS check, LOL. So i really have no major beef with CS personally - although having seen it abused with so many of my friends, I have major issues with it overall.

    Don't get me started on the "Oops, I'm preggo, I'm keepin it, hand over your money and fuck you on seeing the kid". I think men should have an opt out, just like women do. Forcing someone to be responsible for a decision made by one is not fair. It's what contributes to all these kids growing up with absent dads, and angry moms, and lots of issues. Dad didn't make the choice for the kid to be there in the first place, and mom may be being a bitch...what's to be involved for? I see enough women who feel that since he doesn't pay [undefined=undefined]enough[/undefined], and doesn't jump to her idea of stellar parenting, the PAS and dismissal of dad is rampant. I call it the Newerer Betterer Daddee syndrome. He better not stop that check, though! Gah. Gotta stop, this is a soapbox for me.

    As for alimony, DH and I have discussed this. As a second marriage, with a bitch ex, our stats for success were not high. So after kids, we talked about how we would handle divorce, should it occur (it's not a worry, but we are both realistic). He had no issues with alimony. While he missed out on time with the kids, because I was there, I recorded tons of stuff a daycare provider would not have, was able to share all the little things I knew he would be interested in. Since we have a special needs kid, shit, that first year of DX I would have been fired, I was up at the school so much. He agreed that a year of alimony to help me, were I not working, was fair. Now, it would not be. I am working outside the home. If both parties are making income, alimony is not appropriate.

    We had two choices when we had kids. One was to put the kids into care, thus having both of us miss out. The other was to have one of us give up the career for a time to be there for the kids. Since he made more, that person was me. He has no issue helping me out if needed because my career did take a hit for something that WE decided was best for our family. I was the one who got to make the sacrifice. In the end, I usually do for his career. That was part of our agreement also. So if I needed a year of alimony, he wouldn't begrudge that. Our daycare would have been lots more expensive than a year of alimony, with two small kids, one an infant, LOL. Daycare is a total racket, and you still don't pay what a good provider is truly worth.

    It goes back to the idea that women feel they are "owed" something for having a kid and deigning to be married.

    Whatever. I gained by marrying. So did DH. To us, for us, alimony and CS are compromises. Both of us love the kids, and would love to be with them. Reality is though, my career had more flexibility, and still does. So I take the kid hits via work.

    What I think is interesting is that when a man gets palimony women are outraged. If his spouse made more, and he took the hits career wise for the kids, he deserves it to get back on his feet via his career.

    It just needs to have a stop date. Not easy, when you have states like MA that award it for life.

    Oh! And yes, I totally am glad I stayed home. I would much rather have worked, as I am not truly in love with being a SAHM, but our kids and our family benefited. Life is more chaotic now that both of us work. We believe in being home until school though, because we both had that growing up. I wouldn't trade it for anything. Perhaps would have invested in more wine, though....LOL.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bjornfellhanded
    replied
    RE: Accountability

    You know I am of the opinion that I know that if I choose to have a child I am legally responsible for it. But when I did not want to have a child but it gets forced on me well I guess at the same time tht I will take the responsibility just because that is what I have always been taught y my fath mostly. But I do have a line in the sand that I am going to draw. Their is no way in hell tht I am going to pay for her to do noting with her life and just live off my pay check and what I give that is suppose to go to the child. On top I have decided that if I am ever in a situation where you are trying to make me pay for a child that I am not even allowed to see, I am going to quit my job, get rid or destroy everything worth more than 20 bucks and you ain't ever gonna see a peny from me. He'll I can live pretty on the system that they have set up.

    I know that sounds pretty ad but in reality it's not hell you can make enough in a day just pan handling that with a half decent mind you can live off it. He'll if it really comes down to it I'm sorry but I have done things in my life that I know I could go back to doing and the government nor the bitch with the kid I'm not allowed to see for no other reason than she wants to be a vindictive bitch a ever gonna see a penny off.

    Leave a comment:


  • Shadizar
    replied
    RE: Accountability

    I never understood alimony either.

    If I quit my job, get laid off, or get fired, I'm not owed a salary, I'm on my own, tough luck; at the very most, I'm owed a severance check. I've made this point several times over the last few years, you know what the answer is, "well that's what it is, a severance check"; are you fucking kidding me??? My severance check would last me a month if I was lucky and frugal, not ten years. Feminism has turned the courts into the mafia.

    "Ima make you's an offa you ca't refuse."
    "I see we're gettin somewhere then."
    "You's gonna pay us X amount a monies, fer yer pertection."
    "And who may I ask, am I being protected from?"
    "From us."
    "I see."

    Leave a comment:


  • Rog
    replied
    RE: Accountability

    Originally posted by LiliM
    While being at home with the kids is a blessing, I personally enjoy working. I am glad I stayed home with them, because they deserved a parent at home. Had I the more lucrative career, DH would have stayed home. It was just a matter of numbers.

    The problem with staying home is that once you are out of the work force for a time, your absence is suspect. I have friends who were UE for over a year (men and women) who had to explain that year gap on their resumes. The job force does not like absences.

    So a short term period of alimony to help the person, male or female, get back on their feet and become meshed into the working world again, if they are not working at the time of divorce, I get.

    But this lifetime shit? Are you fucking kidding me? It's bullshit.

    There needs to be a cap on it, and it needs to stop for ALL recipients at some point, sooner rather than later. I hate the idea that women seem to feel that they are entitled to be paid for having been married and spat out a few kids at some point in their lives.

    Hate to be a bitch, but sheep spit out lotsa kids - it's not rocket science, and most humans do it fairly easily.

    Like most things that were designed to be fair - the person ponying up for the "fair" gets the no vaseline bend over.

    MA awards alimony for life to women married less than 5 years. No wonder DHs ex wants to get married there. Greedy cunt.

    To the argument that a woman's payment for staying home is being with the family - that's true, but the harsh reality is that Joe Employer does not give a fuck about how rewarding it was. Joe Employer wants to know if your skills have gone to shit, can you be counted on to be there, how much training will they have to do to catch you up to speed, and can you even be caught up with having say, 5 years out of your field.

    I took a year off when my second kid was born, and I had to do some CEUs and brush up when I got back to working (I worked out of my house for a number of years). There is a financial cost to being out of the profession.

    So to give the spouse, man or woman, a grace period to get themselves back into the working world, with training to get them up to date on the goings on in their field - that is what alimony should be used for.

    If a spouse is working, then no alimony should be awarded. CS is already used to level the financial playing field in the homes (which is bullshit to me as well, but that's a separate post), there's no need to add alimony on top of it.
    short term alimony has been abused into lifetime alimony
    do you recognize that you gained something from staying home with your kids?(it looks like you do) can it be taken away from you? can the man get back what he missed? then why should he have to pay a woman for this gain and lose out himself at the same time? women should accept that they give up career for family BEFORE they decide to go for family and not use men as slave labor to support them when they choose to leave the relationship and go back to work,, because you know what? the man isnt going to get back all the years his spouse got to stay home and bond with their kids (i still cant believe nobody places more than a passing value on this)

    child support laws have been abused to the point where its standard fare for a woman to "find a donor" and force him to pay, when they were originally supposed to be for i believe not excluding life insurance for children whos fathers wernt married to the mother
    if a law is put in place that has loopholes and financial gain you will find people will make it standard practice to justify those gains..this link refers to the courts holding men responsible for their actions within months of excusing women from them in Roe vs Wade
    http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/hardtruth/roevswades.htm

    Leave a comment:


  • LiliM
    replied
    RE: Accountability

    While being at home with the kids is a blessing, I personally enjoy working. I am glad I stayed home with them, because they deserved a parent at home. Had I the more lucrative career, DH would have stayed home. It was just a matter of numbers.

    The problem with staying home is that once you are out of the work force for a time, your absence is suspect. I have friends who were UE for over a year (men and women) who had to explain that year gap on their resumes. The job force does not like absences.

    So a short term period of alimony to help the person, male or female, get back on their feet and become meshed into the working world again, if they are not working at the time of divorce, I get.

    But this lifetime shit? Are you fucking kidding me? It's bullshit.

    There needs to be a cap on it, and it needs to stop for ALL recipients at some point, sooner rather than later. I hate the idea that women seem to feel that they are entitled to be paid for having been married and spat out a few kids at some point in their lives.

    Hate to be a bitch, but sheep spit out lotsa kids - it's not rocket science, and most humans do it fairly easily.

    Like most things that were designed to be fair - the person ponying up for the "fair" gets the no vaseline bend over.

    MA awards alimony for life to women married less than 5 years. No wonder DHs ex wants to get married there. Greedy cunt.

    To the argument that a woman's payment for staying home is being with the family - that's true, but the harsh reality is that Joe Employer does not give a fuck about how rewarding it was. Joe Employer wants to know if your skills have gone to shit, can you be counted on to be there, how much training will they have to do to catch you up to speed, and can you even be caught up with having say, 5 years out of your field.

    I took a year off when my second kid was born, and I had to do some CEUs and brush up when I got back to working (I worked out of my house for a number of years). There is a financial cost to being out of the profession.

    So to give the spouse, man or woman, a grace period to get themselves back into the working world, with training to get them up to date on the goings on in their field - that is what alimony should be used for.

    If a spouse is working, then no alimony should be awarded. CS is already used to level the financial playing field in the homes (which is bullshit to me as well, but that's a separate post), there's no need to add alimony on top of it.

    Leave a comment:


  • eastEuropeMan
    replied
    RE: Accountability

    Originally posted by Rog
    Will women ever be held accountable for decisions only they have the right to make?

    Alimony

    Why does society view this as a debt owed to the woman by the man for the time she lost during her career while she was raising the children? Shouldn't this be a debt that she owes the children that ultimately she decided to bring to term? and if she decides to have children shouldn't the loss of career be factored into her decision?

    thots?
    women being given money after divorcer ? What is this nonsence !
    A man should not be required to give anything to a woman after divorce.

    We are both human bings , why does the law make man the financial slave of woman ?

    Where can I sign a petition against alimoney ? Has anyone proposed these issues to politicians ?

    Leave a comment:


  • Rog
    replied
    RE: Accountability

    Originally posted by Aimee McGee
    This is why we need male contraception. It would then make the conversations about child raising duties more relevant and could potentially open up 'pre-contraception' contracts.
    In my family brother and BIL did some stay at home parent time. Other sister farmed in partnership with her hub so the babies were regularly found in child seats in the ute as they shared care responsibilities.
    As for alimony, with 50:50 division of marital assets, why should one partner be liable to support the other. I see this as paying twice, because likely the person paying alimony earned the lions share of the matrimonial property
    there is more to this than just financial ,,
    when a woman gives up her career to raise children she gets the reward of family and this is never taken into account ,, i dont know how many men i know who would have loved to see their childs first steps instead of working 60+hr weeks in the oilpatch
    also when theres a divorce 90% of the time the woman gets to keep the children and is ALSO awarded alimony so she gets the reward of family/children and gets to keep her investment there AND she gets to demand to be paid back for the sacrifice she made to get those children as well,,, complete horsecrap....

    Leave a comment:


  • TheUprightMan
    replied
    RE: Accountability

    Alimony only makes sense in a world where a woman can't support herself. There was a time when women were limited in ability to generate income but this is not that time. If two adults get married and later decide to get divorced, after a 50/50 split of resources there shouldn't be a need for the woman to be supported by the man as though she were some kind of child in need of taking care of. To anyone who considers them self an adult, alimony shouldn't be an option. I don't think I could ever take someone who was living on alimony seriously, they lack one of the fundamental characteristics of an adult, financial independence.

    Leave a comment:


  • Aimee McGee
    replied
    RE: Accountability

    This is why we need male contraception. It would then make the conversations about child raising duties more relevant and could potentially open up 'pre-contraception' contracts.
    In my family brother and BIL did some stay at home parent time. Other sister farmed in partnership with her hub so the babies were regularly found in child seats in the ute as they shared care responsibilities.
    As for alimony, with 50:50 division of marital assets, why should one partner be liable to support the other. I see this as paying twice, because likely the person paying alimony earned the lions share of the matrimonial property

    Leave a comment:


  • Troll
    replied
    RE: Accountability

    More often than not marriage is to men what rape is to women, but one is sanctioned by the state whereas the other is not.

    Leave a comment:


  • Rog
    replied
    RE: Accountability

    ok so its only partially true but happens a majority of the time?(thanks for the great link btw) 98% really? i didnt know it was that high (i get the whole " it can happen to a woman also" thing from feminists all the time)

    but most of this is irrelevant anymore women should not expect to take more than half of what a man owns then expect a monthly cheque as well ffs...

    Leave a comment:


  • Dannyboy
    replied
    RE: Accountability

    Here's a little history lesson for the law regarding that in Canada.
    Am going to post the intro the rest is up to you to read.
    "The obligation upon a husband to support his separated wife was embodied in the first written laws, the Code of Hammurabi, about 1792 to 1750 BC. This obligation was known in early English ecclesiastical law, and, in 1867, was shifted into the secular realm by Parliament. Since England allowed for payments to a wife on divorce, Canada, by default, took this provision in the context of divorce. The provinces also had their various forms of alimony, which could only be actions limited to separation (judicial separation), or for alimony or maintenance only (except Nova Scotia, which had its own divorce law prior to Confederation)."

    http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/articles/alimony

    Leave a comment:


  • yennedtrebor
    replied
    RE: Accountability

    Alimony is monetary revenge, or in some cases, the goal of marriage!
    This is why I recommend to anyone getting married, no matter how perfect your sweet angel is(men and women both!), is an extreme prenuptial agreement legal binding that neither will seek nor receive alimony, and that all possessions preceding the marriage are off limits! Definitely worth the few hundred bucks to pay an attorney. Not sure if this is an option in all states.

    That said men have reproductive options too... even if it's extremely limited to "don't have sex" or cutting off sperm production 100%. I suggest these for basically all men as well until you're 10000% ready for kids, and then only with a married spouse with those papers in hand..
    Premarital relations? better have a 0 sperm count :P

    Leave a comment:


  • Rog
    replied
    RE: Accountability

    i dont see the validity of it for the time taken off to raise children tho? this decision is in the womans hands only and the man has 0 say in it even if she is married,, shouldnt she be responsible for her own actions and the consequences of those actions?

    if im not mistaken NOW fought the California legislation that would overturn lifetime alimony (pay the woman till yer dead if she divorces you after 10 years,,can equal 60+ years of alimony on a 30YO man) so another feminist "Equality +" situation unless im wrong?

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X