HorrorMovieFans.com

I present to you: Alimony

Did you know that only 3% of men receive spousal support in divorce? Why is this injustice not brought up more often? Is it because men are the victims?

Because by and large, men make more money, and even in the cases they don't, women have been oppressed. A woman could be fucking the pool boy for years, when she wants to call it off, you'll still get dicked harder than her.

Lol. As if on cue. I clicked thinking “I bet this is about injustice towards men”

showa58taro wrote:Lol. As if on cue. I clicked thinking “I bet this is about injustice towards men”

Well, men are half the population in the world, so it makes sense when something is as blatant as this sexism it should be discussed. Tranny bathrooms already have a thread.

Foo wrote:

showa58taro wrote:Lol. As if on cue. I clicked thinking “I bet this is about injustice towards men”

Well, men are half the population in the world, so it makes sense when something is as blatant as this sexism it should be discussed. Tranny bathrooms already have a thread.

I guess it goes back to why Alimony is paid at all.

showa58taro wrote:

Foo wrote:

showa58taro wrote:Lol. As if on cue. I clicked thinking “I bet this is about injustice towards men”

Well, men are half the population in the world, so it makes sense when something is as blatant as this sexism it should be discussed. Tranny bathrooms already have a thread.

I guess it goes back to why Alimony is paid at all.

The way society is evolving, that is surely a conversation that is past due.

http://family.findlaw.com/divorce/spous ... asics.html

Do you have any evidence of men being denied the support despite being in that position?

Foo wrote:

showa58taro wrote:

Foo wrote:

showa58taro wrote:Lol. As if on cue. I clicked thinking “I bet this is about injustice towards men”

Well, men are half the population in the world, so it makes sense when something is as blatant as this sexism it should be discussed. Tranny bathrooms already have a thread.

I guess it goes back to why Alimony is paid at all.

The way society is evolving, that is surely a conversation that is past due.

I’d expect to see an increase in alimony going forward for some men as “stay-at-home-dad” becomes socially acceptable and women face less overt sexism in the general society.

Headhunter wrote:http://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/l ... 106374256/

"Mirasolo was sentenced to one year in the county jail but only served six and a half months before early release so he could care for his sick mother, Kiessling said.

“She (client) and her family was told first-time sex offenders weren’t sent to prison because people come out worse after they go there,” said Kiessling.

In March 2010, Mirasolo committed a sex assault on a victim between the ages of 13 and 15 years old. He served only four years for that second offense, Kiessling said."

Liberals at their finest. Instead of locking them up, they keep them on the street.

Foo: I can't substantiate your 3% figure. Where'd you get that from?

showa58taro wrote:Foo: I can't substantiate your 3% figure. Where'd you get that from?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes ... imony/amp/

https://www.google.com/amp/amp.timeinc. ... source=dam

Foo wrote:

showa58taro wrote:Foo: I can't substantiate your 3% figure. Where'd you get that from?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes ... imony/amp/

https://www.google.com/amp/amp.timeinc. ... source=dam

So in both cases, it is clearly the case that the discrepancy in payments is not correlated with the discrepancy in earnings, and is much more about the cultural and social side than the legal side. It seems that the Supreme Court have already barred gender discrimination, so not much more to be done legally. Socially I agree but I can't quite see what else should be done to get men to want to ask for it more, or women to ask for it less. Also the "alimony for life" seems a massive contrast to the legal definition of alimony on your legal websites, so I'm a bit confused by this particularly element. It seems wrong though.

It's also an odd one where the "sexism" seems hugely self-inflicted.

showa58taro wrote:

Foo wrote:

showa58taro wrote:Foo: I can't substantiate your 3% figure. Where'd you get that from?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes ... imony/amp/

https://www.google.com/amp/amp.timeinc. ... source=dam

So in both cases, it is clearly the case that the discrepancy in payments is not correlated with the discrepancy in earnings, and is much more about the cultural and social side than the legal side. It seems that the Supreme Court have already barred gender discrimination, so not much more to be done legally. Socially I agree but I can't quite see what else should be done to get men to want to ask for it more, or women to ask for it less. Also the "alimony for life" seems a massive contrast to the legal definition of alimony on your legal websites, so I'm a bit confused by this particularly element. It seems wrong though.

It's also an odd one where the "sexism" seems hugely self-inflicted.

Do you think the alleged gender pay gap is hugely self-inflicted?

Foo wrote:

showa58taro wrote:

Foo wrote:

showa58taro wrote:Foo: I can't substantiate your 3% figure. Where'd you get that from?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes ... imony/amp/

https://www.google.com/amp/amp.timeinc. ... source=dam

So in both cases, it is clearly the case that the discrepancy in payments is not correlated with the discrepancy in earnings, and is much more about the cultural and social side than the legal side. It seems that the Supreme Court have already barred gender discrimination, so not much more to be done legally. Socially I agree but I can't quite see what else should be done to get men to want to ask for it more, or women to ask for it less. Also the "alimony for life" seems a massive contrast to the legal definition of alimony on your legal websites, so I'm a bit confused by this particularly element. It seems wrong though.

It's also an odd one where the "sexism" seems hugely self-inflicted.

Do you think the alleged gender pay gap is hugely self-inflicted?

Depends on what you mean by the pay gap. The idea that a median wage for a man vs a woman may well be influenced by instances that are self inflicted at times. Some women have genuinely wanted and chosen to stay at home. But there are also cases where a woman in a job earns less than a man in the same Job. That’s not self inflicted. Same with number of promotions, that doesn’t seem to be self inflicted either. Those are actual institutional sexist issues against women preventing gender equality.

showa58taro wrote:

Foo wrote:

showa58taro wrote:

Foo wrote:

showa58taro wrote:Foo: I can't substantiate your 3% figure. Where'd you get that from?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes ... imony/amp/

https://www.google.com/amp/amp.timeinc. ... source=dam

So in both cases, it is clearly the case that the discrepancy in payments is not correlated with the discrepancy in earnings, and is much more about the cultural and social side than the legal side. It seems that the Supreme Court have already barred gender discrimination, so not much more to be done legally. Socially I agree but I can't quite see what else should be done to get men to want to ask for it more, or women to ask for it less. Also the "alimony for life" seems a massive contrast to the legal definition of alimony on your legal websites, so I'm a bit confused by this particularly element. It seems wrong though.

It's also an odd one where the "sexism" seems hugely self-inflicted.

Do you think the alleged gender pay gap is hugely self-inflicted?

Depends on what you mean by the pay gap. The idea that a median wage for a man vs a woman may well be influenced by instances that are self inflicted at times. Some women have genuinely wanted and chosen to stay at home. But there are also cases where a woman in a job earns less than a man in the same Job. That’s not self inflicted. Same with number of promotions, that doesn’t seem to be self inflicted either. Those are actual institutional sexist issues against women preventing gender equality.

Who the fuck is Jason B. and what the fuck does he have to do with anything?

Reign in Blood wrote:

showa58taro wrote:

Foo wrote:

showa58taro wrote:

Foo wrote:

showa58taro wrote:Foo: I can't substantiate your 3% figure. Where'd you get that from?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes ... imony/amp/

https://www.google.com/amp/amp.timeinc. ... source=dam

So in both cases, it is clearly the case that the discrepancy in payments is not correlated with the discrepancy in earnings, and is much more about the cultural and social side than the legal side. It seems that the Supreme Court have already barred gender discrimination, so not much more to be done legally. Socially I agree but I can't quite see what else should be done to get men to want to ask for it more, or women to ask for it less. Also the "alimony for life" seems a massive contrast to the legal definition of alimony on your legal websites, so I'm a bit confused by this particularly element. It seems wrong though.

It's also an odd one where the "sexism" seems hugely self-inflicted.

Do you think the alleged gender pay gap is hugely self-inflicted?

Depends on what you mean by the pay gap. The idea that a median wage for a man vs a woman may well be influenced by instances that are self inflicted at times. Some women have genuinely wanted and chosen to stay at home. But there are also cases where a woman in a job earns less than a man in the same Job. That’s not self inflicted. Same with number of promotions, that doesn’t seem to be self inflicted either. Those are actual institutional sexist issues against women preventing gender equality.

Who the fuck is Jason B. and what the fuck does he have to do with anything?

What? Is this one of those insider jokes I’m not meant to get?

at the time that he quoted that, your post said "jason b" as a typo. probably for "job" or something. but it looks like you corrected it now.

zombie wrote:at the time that he quoted that, your post said "jason b" as a typo. probably for "job" or something. but it looks like you corrected it now.

Damn it Z. Way to ruin the counter-joke.

showa58taro wrote:

zombie wrote:at the time that he quoted that, your post said "jason b" as a typo. probably for "job" or something. but it looks like you corrected it now.

Damn it Z. Way to ruin the counter-joke.

i'm not yet conscious enough for humor.