tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3139017677124620997.post1589930735460036540..comments2024-03-28T05:57:41.542-07:00Comments on Adventures In Keeping House: Housewives Should Be ProtectedSannehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08124283361844607678noreply@blogger.comBlogger17125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3139017677124620997.post-67384469527142296012018-09-10T22:26:32.592-07:002018-09-10T22:26:32.592-07:00My brother recommended I might like this web site....My brother recommended I might like this web site.<br />He was entirely right. This post actually made my day.<br /><br />You cann't imagine just how much time I had spent for this information! Thanks!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3139017677124620997.post-71595150140997963412015-06-05T10:08:40.204-07:002015-06-05T10:08:40.204-07:00You are welcome! You are welcome! Sannehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08124283361844607678noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3139017677124620997.post-6757914532761528372015-06-05T08:23:13.013-07:002015-06-05T08:23:13.013-07:00Thank you for you answers. I was sure single mothe...Thank you for you answers. I was sure single mothers get some support from various programs but in my country they don't help very much. This particular case makes me consider how important patriarchal families are were the father is the breadwinner and the mother the homemaker. A homemaker who suddenly has to live on her own after divorce should have chosen a responsible husband years ago, now it's very difficult to repair things, I guess. The problem is not being a homemaker lifelong but the choices we make in life that cannot be undone afterwards. Preoteasa Alexandrahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05996489147504336535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3139017677124620997.post-78029144207066572322015-06-04T12:29:00.159-07:002015-06-04T12:29:00.159-07:00Well, I guess we were not discussing any particula...Well, I guess we were not discussing any particular case, just general principles. I'm not sure about the laws in your country. Here the divorced or single mother will get government assistance if she is below a certain income level, plus you have subsidies for having children. As for the custody, it depends. For the woman to lose custody if the husband is deemed unfit, she must be abusive/drug addict or something similar. It happens after a court decision. I'm not sure how she can regain custody in this situation. Sannehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08124283361844607678noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3139017677124620997.post-48568304817504809972015-06-04T11:59:35.417-07:002015-06-04T11:59:35.417-07:00The problem is now in my country such a person has...The problem is now in my country such a person has no support from relatives, her mother being very ill, husband cannot work or pay anything after divorce. Being a housewife is no option for her because she is working now to support herself abroad. I am wondering if charity is the only option for her, but the law does not grant you parental rights on the base of charity, you have to prove you earn money and live in your country I guess, I wanted to ask you if this is the case only in my country or am I missing something, it's just something I don't know very well. How could a working mother regain her children if she has no husband and not a good marriage perspective at her age of 45? Does she have any chance to raise her children while working her health being weak? What would a judge decide if her only achievement is a very poor salary?Preoteasa Alexandrahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05996489147504336535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3139017677124620997.post-79712917241302480662015-06-04T04:37:58.164-07:002015-06-04T04:37:58.164-07:00Alexandra, are you talking in general or about som...Alexandra, are you talking in general or about someone in particular?<br /><br />I don't presume to give advice in any particular situation especially when I don't know the people in question. Generally though, before no-fault divorce, the one who desired divorce had to present his case before court and prove that the other spouse was at fault. The other spouse then could file a counter claim. The judge would examine the evidence, determine the guilty party and grant divorce decree (or sometimes not). The guilty party usually lost the custody of the kids. The wife had a right to get alimony, unless she was adulterous/left her husband for another man.<br /><br />The Radical now refers to an earlier period of time (generally the 19th century) when father's custody was presumed (unless he was deemed unfit). I'd like to point out that though legal custody was father's, the (young) children still often resided with the mother, unless she was guilty of adultery (for instance, if she divorced her husband because of the fault on his side). I'm in principle O.K. with this system, too. <br /><br />In both scenarios the innocent wife would get life-long support unless she remarried (if there was anything to get from her husband, otherwise, the family would have to help). In the 20th century USA the adulterous wife generally wouldn't get alimony. In the 19th century England, at least, sometimes she would, but I'm not sure of details. I don't know if it answers your question. Sannehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08124283361844607678noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3139017677124620997.post-35536588402676932232015-06-04T03:53:44.531-07:002015-06-04T03:53:44.531-07:00Very deep thoughts in this post. What I wonder is ...Very deep thoughts in this post. What I wonder is something about aging women. 45+ woman who has lost both her children after she abandoned the home and who had never worked before until now where she is working abroad, after she probably will divorce due to violence and alcoholism (husband) - could such a woman get a job in her country if she has no degree, no experience and no property available unless she rents something, but she is eager to regain motherly rights after divorce because she left home out of fright and hunger and husband has no parental rights? If divorce doesn't happen motherly rights cannot be granted again, it's a matter of child security. It's just a question and I would like to see reactions. Thanks. Preoteasa Alexandrahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05996489147504336535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3139017677124620997.post-38909949451860593952015-06-03T12:09:11.394-07:002015-06-03T12:09:11.394-07:00I think in the situation of the wife's adulter...I think in the situation of the wife's adultery it's reasonable to expect the lover to be financially responsible and to pay damages to the husband. The funny thing is, that at least here in Europe most men work in private businesses while most women have taxpayer sponsored jobs, so men collectively keep supporting women while individual men are off the hook. It's socialism vs private property, imo:) Me, I prefer the old system. Sannehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08124283361844607678noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3139017677124620997.post-79148997109659302892015-06-03T11:59:26.280-07:002015-06-03T11:59:26.280-07:00In most time periods men were financially responsi...In most time periods men were financially responsible for women and children, period. Here in the U.S. though ex-husbands were off the hook for paying alimony if the wife was guilty but husbands had no right, until the late 70s to receive support even if the wife was guilty. In a lot of time periods the wife's lover would have to be financially responsible for the adultery in some cases to pay the bride price for the wronged husband to find a new bride or to pay childbirth expenses if he got another man's wife pregnant, etc... One way or another men still had to be responsible regardless of how women were acting. I think the woman's behavior just dictated what man had to be responsible and to what degree... <br /><br />But we live in a time when even preachers wives have careers and pro-life conservative praise women in combat roles... I've seen sites advocating for men to be breadwinners and be the head of household yet STILL praise and exclaim that "yes, wives should have careers!" and give men advice on how to deal with blended families and when the wife makes more money and tell them how to still be *in charge*. Plain absurdity and BS. The Radical Onehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03933489101373415907noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3139017677124620997.post-56961196277001392842015-06-03T11:38:41.800-07:002015-06-03T11:38:41.800-07:00"sew" must be "sue":)"sew" must be "sue":) Sannehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08124283361844607678noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3139017677124620997.post-49057981945379148342015-06-03T11:37:43.305-07:002015-06-03T11:37:43.305-07:00I will admit I don't know much about the detai...I will admit I don't know much about the details of divorce laws in various countries in the times past. As far as I know, in the USA divorce was allowed for "4 As": abuse (including mental cruelty, whatever it was), addiction, abandonment, adultery. I think that the guilty party usually lost the custody, at least in the case of adultery. I think before the 20th century, divorce was allowed for men for adultery and if the wife refused marital rights, for women for abandonment (including husband going to prison long term) and abuse+adultery (male infidelity alone wasn't grounds for divorce). <br /><br />I know in some countries in the case of adultery on the wife's side the husband could sew her lover for breach of honour and get financial compensation. The amount of alimony the wife could get was also dependent on what she brought into her marriage. From Jane Austen's books I know the unfaithful wife would get alimony from her husband after divorce but lose property rights. I think it was different in every country, however, the principle stayed the same. Divorce was supposed to be an exception, not the rule. I agree that in a traditional marriage the idea of a wife (even as a guilty party) paying alimony or child support to her husband is beyond ridiculous. <br /><br />I guess my problem isn't so much the men who believe in egalitarian family norms, as long as they honestly admit it, but rather those who say they want to have "traditional marriage" or "marriage 1.0" or whatever then turn around and deny all male responsibility. It''s just as hypocritical as the modern day feminism. Sannehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08124283361844607678noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3139017677124620997.post-32063683261572694462015-06-03T10:34:41.642-07:002015-06-03T10:34:41.642-07:00And btw they are only against child support if FAT...And btw they are only against child support if FATHERS have to pay it. Mothers, however must always be on the hook for it and they will complain when women don't have to provide "adequate child support and alimony upon divorce." The Radical Onehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03933489101373415907noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3139017677124620997.post-49982740868547364282015-06-03T10:28:58.902-07:002015-06-03T10:28:58.902-07:00*halt *halt The Radical Onehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03933489101373415907noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3139017677124620997.post-76161092866148657342015-06-03T10:27:48.802-07:002015-06-03T10:27:48.802-07:00Personally though alimony should be around (only f...Personally though alimony should be around (only for ex-wives though, whatever men do to justify being financially supported by women is beyond my wildest imagination) as it has been for thousands of years but the child support system needs to be scrapped and overhauled win a new system entirely. It's not about the children anyways and oftentimes doesn't even go with custody and is imposed upon practically anyone these days. I just think the bill for all the necessities of the children, if they are legitimate, should be the responsibility of the father, regardless of where the children live. I think the fathers, unless they are insane or abusive, should decide on where the children live. That's the way it was before feminism. The system wasn't perfect but families were much more stable than they are today. It would put a host to the "custody wars" in a heartbeat. The Radical Onehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03933489101373415907noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3139017677124620997.post-47213899803122396602015-06-03T10:21:34.116-07:002015-06-03T10:21:34.116-07:00It's become my opinion that here in the US it&...It's become my opinion that here in the US it's fathers and fetuses first, women and children last... The Radical Onehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03933489101373415907noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3139017677124620997.post-26576514294139129722015-06-03T10:10:30.156-07:002015-06-03T10:10:30.156-07:00I'm planning to write a post about the damage ...I'm planning to write a post about the damage which easy divorce causes to family and society, but first I'm going to write another historical post. I find it suspicious that (some) men are against alimony and child support, but not against no-fault divorce. I've seen both men and women behave badly and cause divorce, but most guys still did pretty well financially. I can't give any opinion about the state of things in the USA as I don't live there. If there is any man reading this who disagrees, feel free to express your opinion in comments. Sannehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08124283361844607678noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3139017677124620997.post-63174828184551530862015-06-03T09:24:21.988-07:002015-06-03T09:24:21.988-07:00I like this post. I've noticed that these men&...I like this post. I've noticed that these men's rights types always complain about how they are supposedly victimized by divorce yet if you mention stopping no-fault divorces they'll scream murder and defend divorce. I guess family breakdown is OK, so long as they can get whatever they want.<br /><br />My own dad was like them and still is which is why I haven't had anything to do with him since I got married years ago. He even tried to get me not to change my last name to my husband's or to hyphenate it and I, of course, refused. If I ever did change my last name in the future I'd change it to my mother's maiden name. I'm sure that would really burn his *** good.<br /><br />My own dad would talk about how women get "everything" with affirmative action and he literally belieevs that most women don't even know who fathers their children and that they are all getting pregnant just to get child support and welfare. If you mention to him about stopping divorce he'll say "you can't make people stay together if they don't want to!" He didn't want anything to do with childcare when I was a baby, my mother did it all yet when she divorced him because of his drug habbit he pursued full custody just to control and punish her. I was only like two years old and he was able to get EVERYTHING he wanted yet still to this day he'll talk about how victimized men are and how much the family courts discriminiate against fathers and on and on. His last girlfried made twice as much money as he did yet he told her if they were going to get married she had to live the way he does (in a run-down trailer that stays dirty and trashed) and they would have ONE bank account that HE would be completely in control of (despite the fact that she made more than him). She finally dumped him and I was honestly relieved.<br /><br />When my mother re-married after divorcing my father her husband cheated on her even while she was pregnant then finally abandoned her so she had to file for divorce (I guess that means she was guilty I mean after all she filed!) and to this day my brother's biological father doesn't want anything at all to do with him, even though he was born legitimate my brother has been adopted more than once and everything. <br /><br />But yeah, it's all women's fault...The Radical Onehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03933489101373415907noreply@blogger.com