‘How Can I Get Even With This Man (or Woman) Who Has Just Ruined My Life?’
But,if you’ve decided that this is your one-and-only-till-death-do-you part, then for God’s sake, first 1) draw up a prenuptial agreement. Wealthy men who have been previously married usually insist that their third wives-to-be sign a prenup so that their assets are protected; they may have adult children from previous marriages. Often, these second or third wives are marrying for the first time and want to prove that they love this man, not his money, and that they “trust” that their love and marriage will last.
One experienced matrimonial lawyer recently observed that, in his experience, wealthy women are more generous in their
prenups than their male counterparts are.
He also said that while he’d met many a female gold digger (and married one or two himself), most “women can’t be saved from themselves. They naively accept prenups that limit them, and soon find themselves divorced and out on the streets ten stories below their former lifestyles.”
If you have decided to get a divorce — or if your spouse has said they intend to do so — stop. Before you do anything else, 2) identify all your family finances, all the assets from your life insurance to your homeowners policy. Look at the riders. Make sure you know what is in every checking and saving account, your investment portfolio, safe deposit box, and pension investments. Your kitchen piggy bank. The jewelry. Art work. Real estate. Study your tax returns. Usually, men are on top of this. Women, even those with advanced degrees, or careers in finance, sign what their husband/protector tells them to sign. Make sure you know what credit cards you have, what’s owed, what your credit line is, and whether payments are up to date. Understand what your health insurance coverage is.
Another lawyer told me this story:
I have a woman right now who is a Wharton MBA graduate. She trusted her husband to manage the family expenses. She never looked at a credit card statement, a bank statement, or their joint tax returns. She was shocked to learn that her husband was a gambler and the family was living on credit cards. When she hired me, their co-op apartment was in foreclosure and the IRS had liens on their accounts. She is going to pay a heavy price for being so naïve.
Finally: How do I get the right lawyer?
There are some good, practical points in this article, but it leaves out some of the most important issues for those who get divorced–the severe psychological, spiritual and social traumas that some divorced persons must go through, and which must be handled seriously if they are to recover and move on in a healthy way. As someone who has gone through a divorce, I know a bit about it. A person experiencing a divorce should of course look after his or her monetary self-interest and the interests of the children, and the author provides good advice about this, but in order to “win” the divorce, you must deal with these other issues successfully.
In divorce cases in which one of the parties is a victim–and despite what some therapists say there are not always two guilty parties–it is vital for the victimized person to have a network of people upon whom he or she can completely rely on for continuing, lengthy support. A lot of people who haven’t experienced divorce don’t understand how deeply wounding it can be. For those, like me, who believed that marriage was a sacred bond and was meant to be forever, the word “devastation” doesn’t seem adequate to explain the results of divorce. Not only does a person undergoing divorce need the help of friends and family, but spiritual guidance and support from a good pastor, rabbi or priest is essential too.
If I may cite and quote the great Bruce Williams on his radio show, “MONEY TALKS”, “A woman seeking a divorce? She wants something—right? Give it to her—that’s what I did; I gav’er whatever she wanted—yeah, yeah, I know, you got a lotta effort and work into it, it means a lot to ya’, sure; but when all’s said and done, still, it’s just stuff—right? You’cn always get some more stuff—cars, houses, whatever—a man has a tremendous power to get stuff—which a woman doesn’t have, . . . you’re both gonna feel a whole lot better about the divorce if you use it as an opportunity to prepare for the future. You wanna get even? Hey, knock yourself out, but that might be just what you do, . . . and society—judges and your associates and all that will look at you with a measure of respect, if you demonstrate some maturity in this matter, . . . you may just need their helpful participation as you move forward, . . .
Good luck, kid. Hey, it’s been nice talkin’ with you, . . .”.
Good ol’ Bruce Williams. He’s got a point. On the other hand, if you’re like my ex-wife and me, in what might be called the lower middle class, it is an important part of the divorce process to look out for your financial interests, in a different way than it would be for the more wealthy readers of this column.
On the OTHER hand, as Tevye would say, and as Bruce Williams implies, its not ultimately about the money.
Egil is so right on about the emotional destruction, trauma, and torture that can happen. Worse, my abuser set out to do this torture and laughs and enjoys it. Moreover, I have hard evidence of judicial bribery. While I hear professionals talk about how it just appears to be corruption, there are two points I’d like to make. First, what is considered “corruption” needs to be defined more broadly to include the gender discrimination and mental cruelty that the judges I have encountered exhibit. I’m tired of being laughed at, made snide comments about, and called names by judges; all without provocation. I come into court well dressed, prepared, calm, and articulate. The $50M biological father’s motions are always granted immediately without opportunity for me or my lawyers to present argument or evidence. That’s corruption certainly. It is in my opinion state sponsored torture. My daughter has been kidnapped and concealed under an illegal foreign custody order from Virginia that was issued ex parte without notice and based on fraudulent claims that were never allowed to be challenged by Judge Jamborsky — the “hanging judge” specially appointed to throw the case to the father just as the father threatened that he “would go to Richmond and talk to his Republican friends and get a judge who will give me anything I want!” While professionals may be trying to make the judges feel more comfortable with admitting failures and making efforts to change without being held accountable, the fact is that racism and lynchings were corruption. So, why isn’t it corruption what is happening to abused women and children? It is corruption. It is torture. As far as never getting married, let’s not forget that there are plenty of good men and women in the world and marriage can be good… Take heart and look for the good and leave when it’s bad.
I have this THING about correcting that 50% of marriages end in divorce statistic whenever I see it. Do you know HOW they got that figure?? For simplicity, let’s say there were 1000 marriages in the U.S.A. in 2010, and there were 500 divorces during that year–THAT’s WHAT THEY SAY IS 50%. Which is ridiculous on the face of it.
The 500 divorces should be juxtaposed with the total number of marriages in the country. Anyway, I read somewhere the actual number of marriages that end with one or mroe divorces is around 30% total.
Can’t trust statistics! I once saw a statistic when I lived in NH, that the # of drug convictions for the state had gone up 100% over 2 years or something like that. Turned out, went from 2 to 4. So whenever I see statistics given in percentages, I pay no attention unless they include the actual figures and/or explanation of how they arrived at that percentage figure.
In any given year, there are about half as many divorces as there are new marriages. So, a bunch of journalism majors have concluded from this that half of the marriages end in divorce. It’s a fallacy. Since the number of people who can get divorced far outnumber those who can get married, it is a mistake of logic to treat them as though they were equal size. Yet, the journos repeat this myth endlessly because they hear it from other journos.
Thank you. I was hoping someone would call out that fallacy.
My wife and I are coming up shortly on our 32nd anniversary. There are times that we feel like the last tree in a forest full of stumps. One thing that I have learned is that marriage between two selfish people is doomed to eventual failure. A marriage with only one selfish party is going to eventually lead to severe depression for the selfish person’s spouse. The only outs tend to be antidepressants or divorce.
As long as our society rewards and encourages selfishness, divorce will be common.
This is one of the most sensible comments on here, at least among the short ones! (:
I strongly disagree, it is not up to you to punish any one no matter what they did. The idea that you can use the law to destroy some one financially and emotionally and then put the bite on their earnings for the next twenty years is pure evil. THE cause of divorce is this : unforgiveness. A spouse builds up resentment little until it becomes a mountain of anger that they refuse to rationally examine and of course the same standards of behavior NEVER applies to them. So they live their lives out after that still angry and bitter even decades later will pour out venom about what that #$*&^$ did to me. (don’t go there)
Joel, I agree that it should not be a goal to “win” by making someone else suffer. I’ve been through two divorces and for me the goal was to get away to someplace safe as soon as possible. The most I’ve ever wished either one of my former tormentors is hemorrhoids, diarrhea and/or whatever he might have wished upon me. My primary consideration was escape from a terrible and dangerous situation. Unfortunately, my former partners shared no such goal.
Phyllis, your point about getting a lawyer who specializes in divorce is well taken. I would add that “flat fee” divorces are potential trouble sources and I would encourage anyone seeking a divorce to thoroughly think through the financial consequences of a prolonged legal battle.
I have told my adult daughter to think unconventionally when it comes to choosing a life partner and I am supportive of her efforts to do so. It is extremely painful to know that her parents’ battle plans influenced her so profoundly against marriage, so please please please consider the effects upon our children when you decide to shed a spouse.
Half of all marriages end in divorce.
The majority of them are filed by women.
90% of all of them are decided in favor of the woman.
Men have no rights.
It’s pretty obvious that males by nature are oriented to spread their seed yet they are the ones vilified. Who is framing the debate? Why isn’t the maid a home wrecker? Nature has endowed the female with by far the most discretion for her one egg yet blame goes to the male.
Greg, your post is so full of BOGUS.
Why do some of you Roissy DC douchebags spout off about how all you really amount to is a a bunch of sperm quirting morons?
I could use your same idiotic argument for women and say that women cheat because they only have one egg to drop each month and therefore want to have more biodiversity by having more offspring with different men.
Jackwagon.
I’ve been with my husband almost 26 years now in total. We’ve had our ups and downs and our ugliness and we have forgiven each other for a lot. We have basically grown up together.
Oddly, even though we have been financially devastated in recent years, we have grown closer and more understanding of each other than ever.
The truth is, if you love someone, you fight for that relationship and you don’t take the easy way out. You are more likely to divorce again anyway if you DO remarry because it takes TWO people with flaws to destroy a relationship.
Acceptance that you have to love someone for who they are instead of expecting that person to be someone they cannot ever be is a big one.
I love my husband with all my heart and I’m glad we’ve come this far together. I can’t imagine myself with anyone else but him.
Dear Delia: Better get that “imagination” in gear. Assumptions are deadly and it is never to late for him to “grow up” in his own way and own direction. Some of the best divorces occur later in life. Do you know where your husbands mind is ? I’ll bet you think you do. More divorces are a result of more honesty – can you stand the truth ? Ya right…..
The above comment by RHJunior is an ignorant comment. I urge you to read Phyllis Chesler’s Women on Trial. Women who choose to leave a marriage usually do so because they are being terribly confined or abused verbally or physically or financially. Usually, both are in pain, because neither wanted their marriage to end this way. No one wins really, and if there are children, they begin suffering from the moment the marriage begins to break down; the best thing to happen for the children is for both parents to be caring and considerate parents to the children. If one of the parents is abusive to the children or uses the children to get at the other parent (another form of abuse), then the non-abusive parent and the courts have a responsibility to protect the children from the abusive parent; it is being sure which parent is abusive that is where the courts sometimes side with an abusive father, believing him over the abused mother and children – that is a tragedy! Always put the children’s emotional and physical wellbeing first! True to say – that is usually custody with the mother.
(reply is to comment #6 in thread at this time)
I’d be a lot more comfortable with that statement (which is false as it stands, both short term and long-term, because the family court system has been evolving based on this belief) if there were an I feel” or “I believe” somewhere, at which point it becomes your feeling, and everyone has a right to those feelings.
Of course that’s how it’s understood, but it definitely helps to acknowledge this, rather than put out something which is essentially a challenge to truth, like a slap on the mind. I have several people in my family (and active in the divorce) who talk exclusively like this — sometimes saying the most ridiculous things as truth which aren’t even close to it. It’s no problem when one can simply walk away — but when this happens in court, and habitually, big problem.
If this were not just a forum, and something was literally at stake in the comment, could you back it up?
Translation of the brief comment (at least how I saw it is):
I’m bitter because I believe women take it all in divorce.
I think that fact that a lot of women want to divorce (not speaking of just people like me who had to to stay physically alive) may be an indicator that marriage isn’t a good deal for them. Whatever, cannot blame all women for what some women have done, or vice versa.
(Also see KT comment above, which I can verify… )
Leave aside for the moment the pro-feminist bias of this article’s title, here are a couple of things a man can do to get even with the woman who drags him through feminist Hell by divorcing him via almost any court almost anywhere in the modern Western world:
1) Become incapable of earning large sums of money. If she or the Court think you should and will become a bottomless wallet, decline that invitation. Reduce the incentive for confiscating your fisc.
2) Learn to appreciate the gift being handed to you. After all the dust of a divorce settles, there may be only one mouth you have to feed, your own. A divorce may relieve you from being the primary financial support of many other, often unappreciative mouths.
In my parents generation a father was expected to work to support all the members of his family, to work to pay for his childrens’ educations, to work to put away enough so that his wife never has to work a day of her life after he is gone, and to work to leave an estate for his children. Feminism has changed this equation and has relieved father of a significant part of this burden. Divorce may be expensive in the initial stages. Eventually it reduces the financial burden on the man. If she wants to be on her own, let her pay for her own [fill in the blank] and let her pay her share of the stuff for the kids after you’ve been kicked out of the house.
It’s actually more simple than that. Set up an LLC, put all your savings in the corporate account and use it to buy assets.
People don’t understand money. You have an income, expenses, and savings. Give her exactly what she in entitled to under the law, 50% of your income. Deduct expenses from that. The other 50% goes into the corporate account.
Never mix corporate funds with community funds. Every paycheck, 50% goes into the community account, 50% goes into the corporate account. She didn’t marry your corporation, and is in no way entitled to that money or assets in the event of divorce.
She is entitled to community funds, community property, sweat equity. Fine, that’s 50%. You split it upon divorce, leaving her with 25%. Meanwhile your money, the other 50%, and your assets are protected in the corporate account, to which she has no access.
Presumptive paternity is the real matter though, and the reason why I have never been married. I fully understand my responsibilities as a man, and I will support every child that I conceive, after a paternity test. There is no way I am going to agree to a fully binding legal contract whereby I am required to pay child support for every child she conceives. She can’t slap me with child support for another man’s bastard if I do not marry her.
Presumptive paternity and no-fault divorce are deal killers. The way the marriage contract is constructed, in this culture with this court system, a man would have to be a complete fool to get married today. It’s basically a license for her to abandon, betray and bankrupt him.
I’ve been saying this since 1970, when the feminist revolution began. She can buy her own house.
Replying to Sidney Raphael, with appreciation what Scott says, it makes some sense.
I find myself drawn into this conversation, including a woman above that says her sister got into a financially unequal situation after a house was bought.
The extent to which the Federal government has gotten itself into the marriage business, makes it hard for either side to survive based on their ability to support themselves independently, whether male or female. It’s time to be aware of the cultural changes / pendulum because it affects things that affect nonparents, non-married too — and public debt.
It’s all very nice to say, let her pay her own way — but the family courts have been set up to encourage abuse of the other in litigation, and the child support system I personally believe needs to be shut down, because it’s no better, for men or women. Those on this thread who are responding and live in the USA would do well to understand how welfare reform –based primarily on fear of feminism and over-breeding women of color — expanded the welfare state while proclaiming it would reduce it. This was done by diverting money from needy families to trying to manage needy families, and eventually, to setting up entire programs to encourage people to get and stay married, and then other ones to tell them how to parent or co-parent after divorcing. One such is in Oklahoma — the Oklahoma Marriage Initiative. More coming soon in Kansas (attempt to introduce covenant marriage) and Ohio (attempt to eliminate no-fault divorce).
The couple I mentioned in a comment (awaiting moderation) just came by, looking very happy, as I’m writing here (in a public place, Tgiving Day) and I wish them well, and hope they remain happily married.
I have one child that declare she is never getting married and another one that already has a boyfriend she has been taking trips with (note: contact with my kids was eliminated years ago, illegally and after just signing a lease). The intense need of some childless or empty-nest females to devour OPC (other people’s children) seems rampant. Also, the setup basically creates a scenario of “kids for cash,” which leads to horrible situations for children.
Would I like to marry again? I think so — but that’s in part because my faith (or common sense) doesn’t recommend serial relationships, and a few decades with no intimacy ahead is not my idea of a vital life.
All in all, I think until Congress itself has more women (we are, after all half the population), and faith-based organizations (whatever they are) are relinquished of privileged status within government — if not simply remove tax exemption for religious organizations completely (get this — Catholic churches throughout the country have it, sex abuse and all, evangelistic Protestant ones that tolerate if not encourage wife abuse — and demand submission from male church members as well to a hierarchy — or promise help in keeping their women in line in exchange for allegiance) – - – we are not going to see financial motivations for getting married from either sex.
The present form of assuming that someone else is going to take care of the violent, the poor, the criminal, the purposefully indigent, the welfare, the child support enforcement, the divorces, and more — that will have to go.
This struggle between the public and private definitions of marriage isn’t going anywhere soon. The debate over same-sex isn’t likely to, until the Bible is eliminated and people who adhere to it (whether in wisdom or in blind following other others that distort it) are gone — or gone underground — a whole lot of energy is going into solving public problems surrounding these things.
I think the best that can be done is to at least understand, just as plain citizens, for example, that in 2010, and from what I see here — there are 5 different funding opportunities to promote “fatherhood” (whatever that is) and “marriage” (whatever that is). For all the half-families, outcasts, and homeless today, that don’t celebrate this holiday with anyone, please add to any volunteer soup-kitchen time, a look at this:
Some were already awarded, this is just the funding notice:
http://www.fatherhood.org/capacity-building-initiative/funding-opportunities-for-fatherhood-programs
Application Due Date:: August 25, 2011
(1) Pathways to Responsible Fatherhood Grants (from “HHS/ACF/OFA”)
The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Administration for Children and Families (ACF), Office of Family Assistance (OFA) is announcing the solicitation of applications to competitively award cooperative agreements for demonstration projects that support ” …activities promoting responsible fatherhood” as enacted by The Claims Resolution Act of 2010 (Pub. L. 111-291).
{{activities could be almost anything, at this point}}
(2) Community-Centered Responsible Fatherhood Strategies for Re-Entering or Recently Released Fathers
(3) National Resource Center for Strategies to Promote Healthy Marriage
Note: This $1.5 million grant (gift, not contract…) was awarded to ICF International, Ltd., which already does more than $1 billion gov’t business, as announced this past October:
ICF Incorporated, LLC (NRCSPHM) Fairfax,VA $1,500,000
NRCSPHM stands for “National Resource Center for Strategies to Promote Healthy Marriage.”
(there is already public-funded NRCHM “national resource center for healthy marriage” ongoing, which is basically a fancy website supported by HHS and administered by a PR firm in Oklahoma:
http://www.healthymarriageinfo.org/about/index.aspx) This grant (see bottom of the page then look up on TAGGS.hhs.gov by award#) — I see goes straight to a single PR firm in Oklahoma — $3,000,000 X 5 = $15 mill. to maintain and keep updating a website! !!!) This is public funds…description reads “Developing Healthy Marriage Resource Materials” — but most of the curricula have already been developed years ago, and are tweaked for one population or another. This means a channel has been dug from collected USFunds straight to a for-profit firm whose IRS returns the public can’t view on-line (it’s not a nonprofit), and to my knowledge no one is identifying any tangible benefit received by the public from it. After 5 years of no real accountability, apparently this was such a great idea someone came up with the idea of doing another one — this time paying ICF International to figure out how to do more of the same.
($32 million also for Tech & Consulting support for Victims of Crime); (“ICF International delivers evidence-based solutions, training, technical assistance, and tools for developing and implementing programs that strengthen families and communities….ICF helps U.S. federal and state agencies, grantees, nonprofit agencies, and service providers in reaching communities, fathers, and families with the message of how responsible fatherhood is critically linked to nearly every aspect of a thriving community.”. . .)
(4) Job Opportunity for Low-Income Individuals.
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/grants/open/foa/view/HHS-2011-ACF-OCS-EO-0163
This one would sound good, except it’s taking TANF money to encourage low-income people to actually due micro-enterprise projects — it believes these should be in child care — while TANF work requirements themselves discourage recipients (mostly mothers) from doing exactly this same thing. I will bet that on examination, recruitment is through child support offices, meaning fathers are favored for such work, while allowing mothers to do this type of thing would also probably allow them more flexibility for parenting time. (‘ll look into it)
(5) Partnership to Strengthen Families: Child Support Enforcement and University Partnerships (HHS-2011-ACF-OCSE-FD-0155)
http://www.fatherhood.org/Document.Doc?id=251
The State Child Support Agencies are going to skip talking to the custodial parents and establish (more) networking with university levels, including some waivers of the typical requirements for such projects. Notice the URL says “fatherhood” grant although the name is “Families” and “Child” related.
(6) Project to Test a Predesigned Data Warehouse Model
http://www.fatherhood.org/Document.Doc?id=250
STate Title IV-D (Child support) agencies are encouraged to apply.
(there are two more, indicating that we are moving to as much as possible a planned from central source workforce, meaning — how many voters are looking at the plans??)
When one tracks many of these organizations down to brass tacks (which obviously I’ve been doing, and blogging) it often basically boils down to a very, very select group of individuals who crank out marriage curriculum (often with a religious and sometimes very paternalistic basis, which all consumers may not share) — at public expense. AND, they do not file taxes regularly or maintain corporate status properly either — which is one reason by a group of people in Scranton PA took matters to their own hands, sought documentation of payroll and next thing you know the FBI had a case on their hands. Heres’ a sample from Fresno Healthy Marriage Coalition (California) — which in 2010 got a “Responsible Fatherhood Capacity Building Initiative” grant (series began in 2007, i.e., an HHS grant series):
http://www.growyourmarriage.com/index.php?id=131 (National Honorary Board admits whose work they are promoting, including people Bill Coffin, who up to 2010 worked for HHS. Can you spell Crony?)
I could write more, but most of this links pretty straight back to a single organization (National Fatherhood Initiative) founded in 1994 with an HHS grant, and directly to counter people like Dr. Phyllis here, i.e., feminism, and characterizing feminism as destroying America, etc.
From the start it was very clear how to use already existing networks to obtain grants, and then distribute the grants to build corporations at public expense, who then serve as public-funded conduits for private, for-profit franchising opportunity — of downloadable curriculum, which you can pay to become a franchisee of. It’s a formula.
Any discussion of fathers & mothers, divorce, child-raising, and finances after divorce from at a minimum 1994 one happened in the context of these other operations. As a woman who was beat up during marriage, survived it (while working) had credit destroyed, got out, rebuilt to sustainability and then had to fight these forces trying to “equalize” an inherently unequal situation — I am writing about it, and asking others besides me to take the matter seriously, alongside other forums which indicate (zero) awareness of these things.
It is an uncomfortable situation — but sorry, there are uncomfortable experiences in life. Don’t sit still while Rome is expanding beyond sustainability and the leadership is fiddling a “pay no attention” tune. No more bread and circuses!
– - – - – - – - –
Our author here will be presenting in 2012 at the Battered Mothers Custody Conference in just over a month (along with the revised expanded Mothers on Trial) and so I figured putting out some of this information would add to the discussions. I was up there last year, and absolutely nothing was said to even mention the federal grants stream in this area, no mention of “Access Visitation funding” and most women didn’t seem to have heard about it — yet that stream is affecting divorce, and where the children grow up, and has been since 1996!
- – - – - – - – -
Replying to Sidney Raphael, with appreciation what Scott says, it makes some sense.
I find myself drawn into this conversation, including a woman above that says her sister got into a financially unequal situation after a house was bought.
The extent to which the Federal government has gotten itself into the marriage business, makes it hard for either side to survive based on their ability to support themselves independently, whether male or female. It’s time to be aware of the cultural changes / pendulum because it affects things that affect nonparents, non-married too — and public debt.
It’s all very nice to say, let her pay her own way — but the family courts have been set up to encourage abuse of the other in litigation, and the child support system I personally believe needs to be shut down, because it’s no better, for men or women. Those on this thread who are responding and live in the USA would do well to understand how welfare reform –based primarily on fear of feminism and over-breeding women of color — expanded the welfare state while proclaiming it would reduce it. This was done by diverting money from needy families to trying to manage needy families, and eventually, to setting up entire programs to encourage people to get and stay married, and then other ones to tell them how to parent or co-parent after divorcing. One such is in Oklahoma — the Oklahoma Marriage Initiative. More coming soon in Kansas (attempt to introduce covenant marriage) and Ohio (attempt to eliminate no-fault divorce).
The couple I mentioned in a comment (awaiting moderation) just came by, looking very happy, as I’m writing here (in a public place, Tgiving Day) and I wish them well, and hope they remain happily married.
I have one child that declare she is never getting married and another one that already has a boyfriend she has been taking trips with (note: contact with my kids was eliminated years ago, illegally and after just signing a lease). The intense need of some childless or empty-nest females to devour OPC (other people’s children) seems rampant. Also, the setup basically creates a scenario of “kids for cash,” which leads to horrible situations for children.
Would I like to marry again? I think so — but that’s in part because my faith (or common sense) doesn’t recommend serial relationships, and a few decades with no intimacy ahead is not my idea of a vital life.
All in all, I think until Congress itself has more women (we are, after all half the population), and faith-based organizations (whatever they are) are relinquished of privileged status within government — if not simply remove tax exemption for religious organizations completely (get this — Catholic churches throughout the country have it, sex abuse and all, evangelistic Protestant ones that tolerate if not encourage wife abuse — and demand submission from male church members as well to a hierarchy — or promise help in keeping their women in line in exchange for allegiance) – - – we are not going to see financial motivations for getting married from either sex.
The present form of assuming that someone else is going to take care of the violent, the poor, the criminal, the purposefully indigent, the welfare, the child support enforcement, the divorces, and more — that will have to go.
This struggle between the public and private definitions of marriage isn’t going anywhere soon. The debate over same-sex isn’t likely to, until the Bible is eliminated and people who adhere to it (whether in wisdom or in blind following other others that distort it) are gone — or gone underground — a whole lot of energy is going into solving public problems surrounding these things.
I think the best that can be done is to at least understand, just as plain citizens, for example, that in 2010, and from what I see here — there are 5 different funding opportunities to promote “fatherhood” (whatever that is) and “marriage” (whatever that is). For all the half-families, outcasts, and homeless today, that don’t celebrate this holiday with anyone, please add to any volunteer soup-kitchen time, a look at this:
Some were already awarded, this is just the funding notice:
http://www.fatherhood.org/capacity-building-initiative/funding-opportunities-for-fatherhood-programs
Application Due Date:: August 25, 2011
(1) Pathways to Responsible Fatherhood Grants (from “HHS/ACF/OFA”)
The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Administration for Children and Families (ACF), Office of Family Assistance (OFA) is announcing the solicitation of applications to competitively award cooperative agreements for demonstration projects that support ” …activities promoting responsible fatherhood” as enacted by The Claims Resolution Act of 2010 (Pub. L. 111-291).
{{activities could be almost anything, at this point}}
(2) Community-Centered Responsible Fatherhood Strategies for Re-Entering or Recently Released Fathers
(3) National Resource Center for Strategies to Promote Healthy Marriage
Note: This $1.5 million grant (gift, not contract…) was awarded to ICF International, Ltd., which already does more than $1 billion gov’t business, as announced this past October:
ICF Incorporated, LLC (NRCSPHM) Fairfax,VA $1,500,000
NRCSPHM stands for “National Resource Center for Strategies to Promote Healthy Marriage.”
(there is already public-funded NRCHM “national resource center for healthy marriage” ongoing, which is basically a fancy website supported by HHS and administered by a PR firm in Oklahoma:
http://www.healthymarriageinfo.org/about/index.aspx) This grant (see bottom of the page then look up on TAGGS.hhs.gov by award#) — I see goes straight to a single PR firm in Oklahoma — $3,000,000 X 5 = $15 mill. to maintain and keep updating a website! !!!) This is public funds…description reads “Developing Healthy Marriage Resource Materials” — but most of the curricula have already been developed years ago, and are tweaked for one population or another. This means a channel has been dug from collected USFunds straight to a for-profit firm whose IRS returns the public can’t view on-line (it’s not a nonprofit), and to my knowledge no one is identifying any tangible benefit received by the public from it. After 5 years of no real accountability, apparently this was such a great idea someone came up with the idea of doing another one — this time paying ICF International to figure out how to do more of the same.
($32 million also for Tech & Consulting support for Victims of Crime); (“ICF International delivers evidence-based solutions, training, technical assistance, and tools for developing and implementing programs that strengthen families and communities….ICF helps U.S. federal and state agencies, grantees, nonprofit agencies, and service providers in reaching communities, fathers, and families with the message of how responsible fatherhood is critically linked to nearly every aspect of a thriving community.”. . .)
(4) Job Opportunity for Low-Income Individuals.
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/grants/open/foa/view/HHS-2011-ACF-OCS-EO-0163
This one would sound good, except it’s taking TANF money to encourage low-income people to actually due micro-enterprise projects — it believes these should be in child care — while TANF work requirements themselves discourage recipients (mostly mothers) from doing exactly this same thing. I will bet that on examination, recruitment is through child support offices, meaning fathers are favored for such work, while allowing mothers to do this type of thing would also probably allow them more flexibility for parenting time. (‘ll look into it)
(5) Partnership to Strengthen Families: Child Support Enforcement and University Partnerships (HHS-2011-ACF-OCSE-FD-0155)
http://www.fatherhood.org/Document.Doc?id=251
The State Child Support Agencies are going to skip talking to the custodial parents and establish (more) networking with university levels, including some waivers of the typical requirements for such projects. Notice the URL says “fatherhood” grant although the name is “Families” and “Child” related.
(6) Project to Test a Predesigned Data Warehouse Model
http://www.fatherhood.org/Document.Doc?id=250
STate Title IV-D (Child support) agencies are encouraged to apply.
(there are two more, indicating that we are moving to as much as possible a planned from central source workforce, meaning — how many voters are looking at the plans??)
When one tracks many of these organizations down to brass tacks (which obviously I’ve been doing, and blogging) it often basically boils down to a very, very select group of individuals who crank out marriage curriculum (often with a religious and sometimes very paternalistic basis, which all consumers may not share) — at public expense. AND, they do not file taxes regularly or maintain corporate status properly either — which is one reason by a group of people in Scranton PA took matters to their own hands, sought documentation of payroll and next thing you know the FBI had a case on their hands. Heres’ a sample from Fresno Healthy Marriage Coalition (California) — which in 2010 got a “Responsible Fatherhood Capacity Building Initiative” grant (series began in 2007, i.e., an HHS grant series):
http://www.growyourmarriage.com/index.php?id=131 (National Honorary Board admits whose work they are promoting, including people Bill Coffin, who up to 2010 worked for HHS. Can you spell Crony?)
I could write more, but most of this links pretty straight back to a single organization (National Fatherhood Initiative) founded in 1994 with an HHS grant, and directly to counter people like Dr. Phyllis here, i.e., feminism, and characterizing feminism as destroying America, etc.
From the start it was very clear how to use already existing networks to obtain grants, and then distribute the grants to build corporations at public expense, who then serve as public-funded conduits for private, for-profit franchising opportunity — of downloadable curriculum, which you can pay to become a franchisee of. It’s a formula.
Any discussion of fathers & mothers, divorce, child-raising, and finances after divorce from at a minimum 1994 one happened in the context of these other operations. As a woman who was beat up during marriage, survived it (while working) had credit destroyed, got out, rebuilt to sustainability and then had to fight these forces trying to “equalize” an inherently unequal situation — I am writing about it, and asking others besides me to take the matter seriously, alongside other forums which indicate (zero) awareness of these things.
It is an uncomfortable situation — but sorry, there are uncomfortable experiences in life. Don’t sit still while Rome is expanding beyond sustainability and the leadership is fiddling a “pay no attention” tune. No more bread and circuses!
– - – - – - – - –
Our author here will be presenting in 2012 at the Battered Mothers Custody Conference in just over a month (along with the revised expanded Mothers on Trial) and so I figured putting out some of this information would add to the discussions. I was up there last year, and absolutely nothing was said to even mention the federal grants stream in this area, no mention of “Access Visitation funding” and most women didn’t seem to have heard about it — yet that stream is affecting divorce, and where the children grow up, and has been since 1996!
- – - – - – - – -
“4. Come to the Battered Mothers Custody Conference on January 7-9, 2012 in Albany NY. http://www.batteredmotherscustodyconference.org
We will be presenting on the ongoing http://www.mothers-of-lost-children.com demonstrations and hope to organize a Washington DC demonstration right after the conference. As Mothers on Trial author Phyllis Chessler (who will be speaking at the conference) said in admiration of the mothers, “Barefoot and weaponless, they fight on.”
No, We are not barefoot and we are NOT weaponless- – but too many have simply failed to inform us of what are appropriate weapons, and how to use them. These grants — and the counterpoint grants coming from OVW — are essentially canceling it out, while depleting public structures, so long as the custody process is influenced by grants to either side of the equation. I have looked at the profits and where they are going (both sides) and say enough!!
Well, back to blogging.
My experience with divorce left a total distaste for comingling money with another. Marriage might be best if entered into on a business contract rather than the abstract idea of love. We marry before God, yet divorce in a court of man-made laws. Odd, eh?
Diane- My experience with divorce left me with the attitude never, ever to trust a man with your future. I now have my house, my car, my savings and my income. If I fail, it is all on me. I found my life so much more secure. How about you?
That’s how it used to be, in the “good old days”… A father could sell off a daughter for a political alliance, land, a sum of money, and/or some livestock. He gets the goods, some guy gets you, you get bundled off to a convent after you’ve provided an heir and he tires of you.
Grass is always greener over the septic tank.
“Living well is the best revenge.”
~George Herbert, Jacula Prudentum, 520 (1651)
from Wikiquote.
@Clayton’s comments describe my situation very well. There was no cheating involved (at least none I was aware of). The marriage died a slow death because of her extreme selfishness. With two kids, I didn’t want to see the marriage disintegrate. She was neurotic too and I wanted to get counseling, but she wanted nothing of it. She wanted a divorce, but wouldn’t do anything about it because she was afraid of losing the lifestyle, the house, etc.
I finally had to file for divorce to grant her wishes. It felt strange that she wanted the divorce, but I had to make it all happen and push the whole process.
Anyway, almost a decade later (kids are not quite all grown up yet, so I still have to deal with her), her contempt towards me shows no signs of abating. She regularly pries into my personal life, reprimands me for the most ridiculous things, and condescends all of the time.
Funny thing is I’m not living a particularly rich life, but I do what I want, and I do things my way and I have a loving, supportive family and my kids adore their grandparents (my parents) because my parents are fun and loving. Her family… not so loving, much more dysfunctional, and not fun to be around.
This drivers her nuts! I don’t have to do anything to take revenge and I’m not even vengeful… I’m just a little bitter and angry, but I accept that I’m better off divorced. So I just live my life as well as I can and love my kids and enjoy life. I do it for myself, but it drives her nuts!
Live well, and don’t feel you have to “get back at them” for mistreating you.
Accept that you are better off without their infidelities or poor treatment of you. Revenge will just fuel your own unhappiness because it’s a way of showing that you feel taken advantage of and you’re on the losing side. Forget about it.
Just move on. Take care of yourself. Enjoy friends. Eat well. Do what feeds your soul. You have nothing to prove to anybody.
Mark, good for you.
I’m a child of divorce and was very fortunate that neither parents, aside from their own human frailties, ever used the other as fodder for revenge. That would have made an already very sad and difficult situation much, much worse. Divorce for kids is hell, whatever it might be for the parents. I got chewed out by a divorced woman with kids when I wrote an article once talking about broken homes. She was furious: “My home’s not broken. How dare you say that?” I wanted to say to her, “Ask your kids. See if they don’t think their home without their dad and having to visit him on weekends isn’t ‘broken.’”
I didn’t like this article. It dealt only with the more sordid side of divorce, the wanting to get as much as you can — or revenge — and never with what it means on a spiritual, existential level. God/the Church hates divorce because it’s so disruptive, not only of the family involved but of everyone around the family. For the children, it opens wounds that heal very slowly, if at all. It’s the number-one cause of poverty in North America, something the feminists never want to acknowledge.
The lawyers, however, with pre-nups and messy break-ups, are having a heyday and getting very rich.
whoops … neither parent …
Divorce/separation is the number-one cause of child poverty, at least here in Canada. As soon as the family breaks up, there’s a need for two domiciles, which has a way of draining financial resources — unless you’re a Hollywood millionaire, which is why it’s such a shame that so many of our young people see Tinseltown stars as “role models.”
Canada has at least one major family law association in common with the US, which holds conferences with them. One thing I do in networking with women in custody fights across the country (and some in Canada) is simply follow the themes, and I’ve found a group in Toronto copying and citing practices based in specific U.S. states. (I just searched “high-conflict custody Canada” which is jargon for the expansive court programs; here’s a summary from 2001: http://www.dranoffhuddart.com/dl/sd_dl_07.pdf)
Blaming child poverty on divorce in isolation is deceptive — and oversimplistic. It’s possible to have an amicable divorce (and I know some who have) — and assuming both parents are able to work, this doesn’t mean both parents are going to be poor, but in cases where there are serious issues such as physical safety, or child safety involved, this type of situation is a heydey for the court-affiliated business.
As we speak, the FBI has hauled off paperwork from a certain court in Lackawanna, PA — which relates to a certain GAL overbilling parents; the parents in question paid because not-paying would’ve meant not seeing their own children at all. Supervised visitation, which was designed (allegedly) to allow abusive parents to visit their children (though looking at its background, I tend to doubt that), is being turned on the nonabusive parent, typically a mother, and further impoverishing her.
That’s a factor in child poverty obviously — but it is “divorce”‘s fault or the court’s fault? For example, the field of Parent Coordinator, which has been lobbied for through AFCC personnel esp in the 2000s, has already been cause for investigation in the Scranton PA FBI search — it turns out that the PC had not been hired through any identifiable open bidding process, had no contract, and it’s not known who is paying for the office space, etc. The goal is to get all parents into programs of some sort run by certain professionals — and if possible also supported by federal fundings.
Many of these are portrayed as helping difficult parents — but are their services are even needed?
See http://www.afccontario.ca/board_of_directors.html
Right now, Barbara Jo Fidler (below) is head of an Ontario chapter of an international Family Law organization is from Ontario, Canada. The international association has two people, including a judge, from Canada on its current Board of Directors, as well as people from Australia, NZ and across the US. Collectively, they lobby for their own interests.
The President Elect of AFCC is from the same state which recently had the Kids For Cash Scandal, i.e., Pennsylvania. Here’s material from the current President, and if a person reads it, many of the terms and practices of the field show up — for example, a mediator also head of a corporation (Family Solutions) that profits (is in the business of) from divorce. Reunification intervention is a specialty of AFCC in which children are forced to visit with a parent they may not want to see, which may often ben an abuser. This does not go two ways (check your local neighborhoods) and women who have lost custody of children to abusers have no such “reunification interventions” on their behalf — in part because by that time they can’t afford it anyhow. Please notice that the head of this organization is not an attorney but a psychologist.
“Board Of Directors, Executive :
President: Dr. Barbara Jo Fidler ~ ~ ~
Dr. Fidler is a registered psychologist and accredited mediator practicing in Ontario, Canada. ~ ~ ~
She maintains a private practice and is a founding member of Family Solutions, a team devoted to working with separated and divorced families. She provides consultation, reunification intervention, mediation, arbitration, parenting coordination, and expert court testimony. Her practice also includes marital/couple, individual (child, adolescents, and adult) and family counseling. Dr. Fidler provides training and supervision for child custody assessments, parenting coordination, mediation and other special topics relating to high conflict families. ~ ~ ~ ~
Dr. Fidler is on the faculty of the Part-Time LLM (Family Law Specialization) Program at Osgoode Hall Law School, York University, Toronto. She is on the editorial board of the Family Court Review. * * * *She has been actively involved in the development and training of Parenting Coordination services and was appointed to the AFCC Task Force charged with developing guidelines and standards of practice for Parenting Coordination” * * * *
I believe that any discussion of divorce, while involving the personal issues, if it is going to be helpful to both sides, will have to sooner (rather than later — this is already late to bring it up consistently) — start acknowledging the character, extent, and influence of the nonprofit membership organizations in changing the practice — to further impoverish parents and enrich the practitioners — wherever they are in power. In general, a Presiding Judge will attempt to create a unified court system, mandate services to parents, bring in a crony (non-judge personnel) and then forward business to them. It’s basically government-endorsed PR, and all the while blaiming the parents for what the parents — sometimes neither side –had anything to do with other than choosing a poor mate to start with, which is not a crime.
* * *
In this context, blaming child poverty on divorce is simply promoting the marriage education field, which I have to say (having studied its groups and grants) is actually causing child poverty, rather than alleviating it. Sorry to be a little harsh on this one, but I’m not alone: another site describing the process can be found here:
http://www.habeascorpus.freeservers.com/
(scroll partway down to “What Exactly Is Happening in California Family Court?”). I am blogging and commenting on these matters because they are vital to preserving the justice system and due process — which will go a long way towards relieving child poverty, I’m sure, and give those children that survive the divorce situation (some don’t) a better future. I realize this is an inconvenient and uncomfortable discussion, not for chatty settings, but that’s how it is. …
Also of note in Canada are attempts to deal with sharia type courts, which the family law groups I’ve seen are tending towards in nature and language. Consider the impact of valuing family as opposed to the Declaration of Independence which declares unalienable rights, and eventually — with fight — led to simply expanding the definition of “man” to include the second (reproductive) half of humanity, and half that freed up some of these men to think those thoughts, by being slaves, building the houses, planting and harvesting the farms, etc, and sometimes also bearing their children, too. . . .. .
The entire field of “Children’s Rights” is often saturated with groups that have been later found to endorsing their abuse (Second Mile, Penn State scandal). It’s important to understand language in terms of WHO is speaking — and in some sectors Children’s Rights means Your Kids, Your $$, and Forget Due Process.
there is an old italian saying that revenge digs two graves. the one who is leaving is happy and looking forward to a better, freer life. that is the harsh reality. the one who is left behind is rejected and thrown away. the children, too.
financial concerns are a holy thing. you can’t live without money and you have to take care of your children on a daily basis. that’s the divorced wife’s job, usually. if they are very young, earning an additional income without extra paid help is not realistic.
the psychological aspects, for some people, a lot of people, blind them to the realities and pure hot rage takes over. betty broderick wouldn’t be assuaged by huge alimony payments, she wanted her husband and his new young replacement wife, dead, and she killed them.
50% of women said they understood completely what she had done and why she did it and how she felt. (she did seem happier even while she ended up in prison).
most women have a different narrative regarding marriage than men. even the ones who marry for money are in love with being taken care of, if not the husband.
for most women though its about love and loyalty and trust. not very many men would consider those their strong suit.
The hidden agony is the effects of divorce on the grandparents of children whose parents divorce.
The paternal grandparents in plain language “just get screwed all around” by the system.
Mommy gets custody and in a fit of vengenace does not allow the grandparents visitation privilges, calls, text, mail, cards, or birthday/Christmas gifts from the fathers side of the family.
Step Mommy wants to remain distant from her Father/Mother-in-law and refuses the same for the daddies parents. In order to keep her power over the grandparents son.
The Son/Daddy kisses step mommies ass and also refuses visitation rights.
The pain of seperation from children who are loved and missed by their grandparents is beyiond description and occures every birthday, holiday and every missed school event or just the long periods of not even knowing if the grandkids are alive.
My message is to Mommy and Dady, “We, the grandparents did not contribute to your and your former spouses problems, we did not harm you or your new wife or your ex wife you guys did all the cheating, bitching and divorcing it was not our fault yet you continue to play your stupid divorce games and then blame us for your situation punishing us for your sins and mistakes as you do your children for your own narccistic agenda’s.”
All we, the grandparents want is to see our grandkids and have fun with them, know them before we get to old or die. I sit and watch my wife cry her eyes out every Thanksgiving, Christmas, Halloween over your refusal to let them see us.
If you, your ex wife, your new wife have mommy and daddy issues see a Psychiatrist please but don’t blame and punish the grandparents for your issues.
How does one get even with the man who ruins your life when he is your son?
This was so sad to read. Thank you for sharing your perspective.
You make a great point. Too often grandparents are forgotten in these struggles.
Thanks for sharing this heartfelt story! As a grandmother, I cannot imagine never being able to see my grandchild! Today, the importance of the relationship between grandparents and their grandchildren is often not recognized. The young parents and the grandchildren suffer when the grandparents are kept from the grandchildren; the relationships the older generation has with both their adult children and their grandchildren is that important in all their lives. I hope much more is done to recognize grandparents rights, by law, for everyone’s sake.
Many good wishes for you HEP-T in your relationships with your children and grandchildren.
I have been married to the same woman for 37 years. My view is out of every ten marriages nine end in divorce. I know an incredible number of divorced and multiple divorces people but very few long term marriages to the same partner.
I’d say from my point of view all marriages end in divorce today.
What effect does this have on children? My friends stepdaughter has had three legal stepdaddies/daddies in eleven years! One real Dad and two step dad’s! Along with an unknown number of one night stands, boyfriends and Uncle Joe’s parading in and out of her mom’s bedroom. The men are the same with their children watching daddy cavort with different women called “mommy” all through their lives.
This is sobering when you think about the childrens futures as parents.
My wife, whose parents divorced in the early 1970s, when divorce was made easy, calls it, “The gift that keeps on giving.” Of course, think of the German meaning of Gift when you say that: poison. Watching kids trying to make sense of life and do schoolwork when they see Dad on the weekends, when Mom has a new boyfriend or even husband, is incredibly painful. There is so much damage being done by this.
I recognize that divorce is probably necessary in many situations, but I also implore all of you are married and especially if you have kids: work very, very hard on getting past selfishness. You think you are miserable married to your current spouse? The pain is just starting. The pain for your children will be lifelong. Work on finding a way to resolve your differences, and getting past selfishness.
The possibility of an amicable divorce exists. There are divorce mediators who can explore reasonable alternatives to court battles.
http://villagemediation.com/
It never ceases to amaze–and depress–me just how little foresight goes into so many marriages.
Sometimes I think the only thing that comes to mind is one’s wedding day, what with all the pomp and circumstance.
I guess I think it should, also, be more difficult to get married.
This is definately one more area where thinking has been abandoned by too many.
It should be. I see a lot of people look at the first marriage as a “starter marriage”–analogous to a “starter home.” You buy one, and trade up later, and it’s no big deal. It’s a rite of passage, like going to the prom. Not only is there no stigma to a woman being 30 and divorced, it’s actually looked upon as being better than being 30 and never-married. The divorcee is always assumed to have made a mistake by agreeing to become legally united with a jerk or a deadbeat; the spinster is always assumed to have been unlovable (never, never assumed to have been bright enough to avoid legally uniting with the jerks/deadbeats who desired her. Hrmph.)
I agree. When you hear someone is getting married, most often all you hear about is the wedding day. Here’s a hint from someone married for 28 years to the same woman – plan your marriage more than your wedding. After all, the wedding ceremony and reception will be finished in at most a few hours. You want the marriage to last a lifetime.
My wife and I were non-traditional (older than normal) college students when we met, fell in love and got married. Our income was very limited and it was a real struggle. That kind of thing will either make or break up a couple. It made us strong. Since money was so tight, we were married with just two witnesses by a local minister. It was the smallest, least expensive wedding allowed by law. About the same week, one of the big new magazines had a cover story titled, “Big Weddings, They’re Back”. I sometimes wonder how many of those featured big weddings couples are still married to each other after all these years.
The trackback from “Just Don’t Do It” is to “Anti-misandry,” is anti-feminist and is offensive (see the log). OF course PJ media is not responsible for the link.
I do not know if my (long) comment will pass muster and will be addressing this matter on a blog I’ve done which helped me survive divorce. Regarding feminism — I didn’t enter marriage a feminist (although, thanks to prior generations, I did enter with a professional life, and thanks to my parents, and a stay-at-home mother who was — like many of her generation — abandoned as soon as the last child was out of the home — a college degree.
Years of living with a religious batterer and finding no help within the faithful or liberal progressives in an urban SF area called up on the faith (to stay alive, and for courage under fire), eventually a nonprofit which enabled me to file a restraining order to stop this person from assaulting me in front of the kids, which is itself a crime — turned me eventually into an activist, and certainly an appreciator of feminism. I forced me to understand how my government works, which resulted in better citizenship. When my children were stolen overnight, not ONE single person came forth with any protest or anger except from an avowed atheist and early feminist (professional colleague), plus the then-CEO of NOW, Helen Grieco, who in 2005 challenged the HHS to tell what it was doing with the fatherhood funding.
Discussing either feminism or “anti-misandry” without discussing federal finances and nonprofit corporations running the divorce courts, and lobbying for legal changes to favor the industry, is an exercise in ignorance. It is to speak in broad generalities (which cannot be extrapolated to all situations), an argument no one can win.
By contrast, financial statements, tax returns, City and County payments to vendors (which include plenty of court-associated groups) are not so easy to argue away with rhetoric. FYI also, I refuse to be derailed from this more productive conversation for very long; just posting an alert here. I believe that good, ethical, and responsible men and women will, despite my poverty of expressing it other than in sentences, links, and charts — eventually understand that it’s in their best interests not to let the top sector feed off the bottom sector — and I’m referring to those who set policy and those who fund university institutes which literally feed and profit off of divorce distress. For an example of one, look up PAIRS Foundation (Florida), or PREP, Inc. (Colorado).
….
It is obviously odd to come on a comments list like this with a different tone and content. FYI, it’s also very stressful (see “legal abuse syndrome”/http://www.lvaallc.com/, in which prolonged court litigation, especially when with someone who has committed crimes against a spouse or child, and is threatening to commit more) to come on and hear hate talk about my gender based on, well, my gender, and ascribing greed or mean-ness to the reasons for divorcing. maybe — my case has plenty of female “queen bees” involved (in and out of the courtroom). However, a better solution for this might be to have more equal representation — in Congress! — such that those who get to the top of society, or positions of authority — don’t feel that if they do NOT align themselves with the hierarchy-based model, which is (face it) dominated by males, and has been through religion and other means for a VERY long time – they will be sacrificed.
Even Paul, supposedly so anti-feminist (I don’t believe that reading, and I know some Greek and history of Christianity, it’s one of my degrees also) said (Gal 3:) ” 26For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. 27For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. 28There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. 29And if ye be Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.”
There is precious little “in Christ” going on in Christian circles these days, and the same basic (unreformed, one must say) drive behind them as in ancient times – and that is position, prestige, and power. Take away nonprofit status for religious organizations and see where the true believers end up!! (Of course ex-President GWBush starting office with two Executive Orders to go the other direction would disagree). Their Messiah, supposedly, that was hung on a cross was anachronistic in fair treatment of women, per the gospels, rescuing a woman (alone, not with the man) from being stoned for adultery (per John 4). Whether you see this as historical or metaphorical, it sure does make one go “hmmm..” today. Possibly he was crucified for not being warlike and masculine enough?? Equal status for women even then I bet would have definitely upset the economy in a major way, such as possibly fewer wars for breeding and slave rights.
(see book AD 381, on the shutdown of dialogue to preserve the Roman empire, aka, the beginning of the Monotheistic State)
For comparison, see current SF area civil rights and family law attorney discussing how suppressing polygamy (DOMA) was typical of Western Judaeo-Christian intent to dominate Islam, alongside how we should scrap the Constitution, which is, alas, taken at face value like Christians take their Bible. Frightening…. (Practicing family attorney believes the constitution should be rewritten.)
Scroll down to the section “The History of Marriage — from Polygamy to Monogamy.”
http://www.sanfranciscobayarealaw.com/2010/11/28/california-same-sex-marriage-federal-lawsuit-rumbles-amidst-a-backdrop-of-centuries-of-catholic-church-and-state-interference-in-marriage-rights/
I felt Dr. Chesler might want to understand this is affecting custody cases in a state and county that has helped set the standard nationwide.
Also (another section) from an SF attorney seems relevant:
2010 Canadian Lawsuit Considers Constitutionality of Polygamy after Same Sex Marriages are Legalized in Canada in 2005
“The continuing influence of the Church and the State in the legislation and enforcement of marriage is felt even today by activists fighting for their right to non-traditional marriages, be they between same-sex couples or polyamorous groups, such as traditional Mormons.
“This month, for example, the British Columbia Supreme Court began a trial to determine if its anti-polygamy laws are unconstitutional, a case that was initated when Canada’s Prime Minister, Paul Martin, commissioned a $150,000 study by three noted law professors to nebunk any notions that Canada’s new laws permitting same sex marriage would lead to polygamy. The case has attracted aggressive opinions about polygamy from legal scholars (Prosecutor Craig Jones) and academic intellectuals (Stanford Classics Department Chairman Walter Scheide) equating it with child abuse, backward societies, and a threat to safe and loving relationships, and touting monogamy as the backbone of Western civilization. Interesting – you don’t say? Now, where have we heard that before?”
I know the USA has many sins and many shortcomings, but abolition of slavery, granting (male) slaves (1800s) and then (all ethnic groups) women the vote — and the Bill of Rights — are not among them.
Sun Myung Moon (see Unification Church, and supporter of the Heritage Foundation — real big on “Family” matters) has sworn that individuality is going to take America down. Maybe he has a point if we continue to ignore the forces that refuse to classify females who have given birth (or for that matter low-income males) as human beings, with “certain unalienable rights.”
If this talk sounds like “Greek” to you, visit the blog, and bear with it some, it’s been a rough divorce the past decade, without even assets to fight over. It’s a sign of the times when a system can take two working parents and turn them through incentives, attrition, and force, into two unemployed parents and children with neither parent resident in the home. My options, otherwise were to stay married and get killed, possibly along with 2 or 3 others, or have a wasted life and theirs too. I’m definitely not that unique — this is a boringly common scenario, and sooner or later, it may be someone’s turn on this comments list to take part.
Taggs.hhs.gov
usaspending.gov
Google “TANF” reform, and read the Congressional records leading up to it.
Check out that scrantonpoliticaltimes forum — it’s active, it’s got multiple threads, and fully 3 of them deal with family court matters that relate to national movements. A great case study of what can happen when a group of people led by a won-t be-intimidated and, while you’re at it, show me the money, person — who happens to be a man. He even makes snide sexist remarks about women — while doing more for them than many domestic violence nonprofits have in a long time. So, do I care? — he’s –and they — are getting a work done, and I’ll support that any day.
http://dohertydeceit.com/
http://dohertydeceit.com/cases
(He sounds like a royal pain in the ass to certain governmental entitities; guess why I can identify with that!)
The great, and late, Swami Shri Yukteshwar, once wrote: “I do not expect anything from others, so their actions cannot be in opposition to wishes of mine”. Likewise, I do not expect anything from my wife, so whatever she does, does not affect me. I do not care whether she cooks, whether she cleans, whether she laundries, whatever. I have known her since she was a teenage tomboy, a while back, and boy, I used to expect lots from her, thus we fought bitterly. But Yoga, coupled with a nice decrease in testosterone (as Luis Buñuel once acknowledged), allowed me to surrender and to expect nothing from her. Thus we have a great relationship.
The great, and late, S. S. Cohen, an Iraqi Jew, now interred in Sri Ramana Asrama, Tiruvannamalai, in 1930 wrote explaining his move: “to the wasted energy, the false values…to the social rules that have been laid down by many generations of selfishness, convention and superstition…and the bitter jealousy and hatred they breed in the minds of men”.
Si, it is the ego, the Shadow that stands between and all “normal” relationships. It is the ego in the mind, that has become madder, who is the slayer of marriages.
Well, I see you DID recommend someone to “pray” ! WOW, to Whom?
The Holy Bible says, “Except the Lord build the house they labor in vain to build it…”. I know there are exceptions, but generally speaking, people who leave God out of their lives every day except the day they are confronted with a BIG problem, are totally shocked at it all.
Moses changed the divorce Law of God for, Jesus said, “expediency”, knowing they would not keep the Law in the first place. But this was not the code of the day.
Neither should it be today. Instead of telling people to make prenuptials, tell them to PRAY first, every day and stay in contact with their Creator God Who is the Only One who can help them stay faithful to their spouses. Being faithful to God leads to being faitful to all others.
Very much agree with what you said.
If I could type in small letters I would say, there are no magic bullets. If however you walk through your marriage as hard working partners and servants to each other in the Lord, you will not fail. Two are better than one when it comes to falling, fellowship and fighting.
I thought I loved my first wife, but I got into broadcasting and was inundated with calls and various offers from gals. It went to my head, and when one of them really impressed me, my self-centeredness took.
Today, at 81, I’m happily married. My marriage is good, but at the same time, I know that I committed a terrible wrong on my first wife.
Women are not safe even if they don’t get married. Since men have “sperm rights”, donating a single cell now gives a man authority over a woman’s offspring and in doing so gives the man authority over a woman’s life, schedule, destiny, and/or the ability to take a child away from the mother and’/or force the mother to defend her natural right to raise her own child by spending thousands of dollars in legal fees. No woman should ever have to defend the right to raise her own child when she has never been married and is financially able to support herself and her child. Yet some misguided feminists as well as father’s rightsters (fatherhood supremacists) routinely call this “equality” when it is really more subjugation of women and children to men. Women must demand their natural right to raise their own children without being subjected to male authority.
GREAT post, KT
Well said, KT, I agree with you!
And whats your answer to the woman who would enslave him to her for 22+ years of child support should he not want the child but she does? Or is her hand to remain in his wallet, all the while she claims she “doesn’t need a man to raise a kid”?
If you don’t want the “sperm donor” to have any say with his biological kid, get your hand out of his wallet.
Phyliss, very timely article. My sister is in a bad situation where her husband is constantly on her about what she doesn’t do. She keeps an immaculate house, volunteers at school and is raising two amazing children (one special needs). She stopped “working” once the kids went to school and his latest attack is she can’t spend “his” money since she doesn’t contribute financially to the household. They bought their first house together based on combined incomes and piggy-backed that into an amazing single house. She recentlty told me she is afraid to leave because she has nothing. A marriage is a partnership…serioulsy, when did men get off on this path that what they earn is solely theirs?
Thanks for this comment and I wish your sister the greatest success in finding a happy and financially sound resolution for her difficulty. Would he try marriage counselling? If the marriage has become too severely bad for her, she shouyld simply leave and begin again, she obviously has skills and a responsible and conscientious way about her, so she can likely successfully start a new life. Nice she has a caring brother!
There is a new book out (in Kindle right now, paperback to be out soon) called “Divorce With Sanity” by Richard S Rabbin. It offers a new and enlightened way to view and proceed with the ending of a relationship. The author shows us how we can rise above our pain to allow a heart-breaking situation to be an opportunity for great self-realization and growth. Using examples from real cases, he shows first hand how events can quickly spin out of control and create even more chaos, affecting not only the couple but the children as well. He also offers ways in which we can construct a healthier, more productive and healing outcome rather than get caught up in an adversarial process. This book is definitely important for anyone contemplating the end of a marriage.
Trust me on this, there is no such thing as a revenge divorce. I had the best divorce attorney imaginable, one whose very name strikes fear into the hearts of errant spouses everywhere and causes them to settle almost immediately. Thanks to her, everything went smoothly in spite of my ex-spouce’s attempts to stonewall the process. There was no great wealth to divide, so my only financial loss was the bed and the computer she took with her when she left (and she waited until I was out of the home to sneak them out); we had no children, so I will never have to meet up with her at school functions, weddings, etc., i.e. I willl never see her again; and there was no domestic violence involved (not the physical kind, anyway, and even the verbal abuse was one-sided: hers). But the pain of rejection, the knowledge that nearly nine years of marriage had been a sham from the beginning…those feelings hung on on for a couple of years and, in some small ways, will probably always linger. What could erase those feelings? Could a large settlement, public disgrace, even (I am not suggesting this) a mob hit take away that sort of pain? The answer is a resounding NO. Nothing but time and faith heal these pains.
I got a divorce some years ago. I lost the apartment and the kids. It was actually quite nice being a “every other weekend and half of the holidays”-mom. And it was worth a LOT of money not being married to my husband anymore. I’ve sucked it up when he insulted me, pressed me for money and tried turning the kids away from me. Not because I’m a saint, but because I knew the kids would suffer. They always do when parents bicker. Now the kids want to stay with me, and I don’t ask for money from their father. I get by, and he would only take it out on them. I’m a firm believer in men’s right not to support their ex wives, only their children. Women who treat men as wallets are despicable. Ironically that’s how my ex husband treated me.
I disagree with the philosophy that men are not responsible for their children and their children’s mothers financially. If you have the child of a janitor, you get enough child support to support yourself and your children on what a janitor can provide. If you have the child of a $50M man, then you should get enough child support to support yourself (even if you want to be a stay at home mom) and your children on what a $50M man can provide. Period. While I’m not asserting judgment on your choice, your choice to refuse to accept support and work should not be adopted as public policy for all mothers/fathers and children. If a father wants to be a stay at home father, there’s nothing wrong with that either and a wealthy mother should provide for that good situation.
Today it is (or should at least be) easier to divorce, which should mean, having no more to live with a person you don’t like, who doesn’t like you (…).
In the past it was impossible (mostly for women/females) to show disappointment for the bad (or worst) relations existing between a wife and a husband
[whose problems heavily and negatively affect (their) children,
that the couple (or parents) realize that or not].
Best thing of all should be to create an efficient “divorce’s culture”, which means, being able to close a story which doesn’t work anymore,
and do it in the less painful, less irrespectful, less trivial, less degradating and less humiliating manner possible,
with the focus on the wellbeing of children (who are the future adulte of our society/ies …,
and who are powerless both against their parents, and against society and life themselves).
I ignore how many people went for a (psychological) therapy or analisis before getting married (which is a very important step in life),
and/or how many follow a therapy or analisis after they (truthfully) realize, that their marriage is not that wonderful (…).
Otherwise, I think (observe) that women are much more responible than men, when it comes to family and children,
which means not, that more responsibility is not needed and required from men!
Lightful regards.
Three thoughts:1) moral compass, 2) greed, 3) averice. Simple.
If these poor lost souls would have read some pages of the bible (or religious reading of choice), reenforcement of their morality and “humaneness” who knows, would have given love and wonderment to their conjugal life.
With God,all is possible. Without the Almighty, mankind will surely suffer long and hard, ergo the 50% of Americans (every year) suffering, separated and alone.
Spiritualness is the glue that holds a conjugal life in harmony. The almighty has paths for mankind to follow…its already laid out for us. Just read.
God Bless America.
The best advice if you’re a man…DON’T GET MARRIED AT ALL. The legal system is stacked against you in this country. If you are stupid enough to get married and have children (and you’re a man), bend over and take “like a man” because you’re to get screwed.
Simple answer: You ruined your life, unless you are in an arranged marriage, and you can’t get even with yourself.
Choose wisely, or be lucky. Thirty-five years and counting. Mostly luck, but luckily, I chose wisely.
At the risk of provoking a firestorm, your odds improve if you avoid American Princesses – probably any princesses, but there are more entitled brats here than anywhere I’ve ever been. An attitude of entitlement is about the most toxic thing there is. If you’ve got it, don’t bother – you’ll make two people miserable. If she’s got it, run.