Not one penny more …

pretty penny

Decades ago I’d never have written this.  All bar one of the “shockers” I had with wives, gfs etc. occurred long ago.   At the time, even though it was personally bad between the two parties, there was still a reasonable attitude overall in the society or maybe I was imagining it.  The experiences certainly didn’t sour me enough not to try again.

These days, I have nothing personally to complain of this way, so why so intransigent on the issue?   I think the answer comes down to one party taking the yellow fluid.   There was one lady I did part with decades ago and I still resent the $1485, even now.   In general, how much she put in, how much I put in over the journey – I wouldn’t have a clue and am not interested.   Who counts?   But this $1485 was obtained after we’d split up and under false pretences.  It was meant to be for the children but was anything but.

………..

There is a second principle alive and kicking in this matter as well and that is that it’s always the minority of unreasonable people who ruin it for the majority.   The tales we hear might only refer to a certain percentage but sadly, everyone gets tarred.  This therefore is not about every woman.  It’s about a particular type and the steam is coming out of my nostrils as I write.

………..

The man in the news might have been a cad, he might have been a nice guy, she might have been a grasping bitch, she might have been genuinely concerned for her daughters.  I’m not commenting on their specific situation, not least because it might be sub judice.

However, I shall comment in general.

This is so fundamental, so intrinsic to the very essence of what a marriage is, so bitter, that for a woman not to understand the depth of rancour on his part is to totally misunderstand men.   And for him not to understand how she is transformed from a loving spouse into a ravening golddigger is one he can’t get his head around either.

There are two completely separate issues here – taking care of the children … and keeping her in the lifestyle to which she has become accustomed.   I think most men, including me, would look askance at a man not contributing to his children until they’re 18.   I mean, that should pretty well be taken as read.

The other matter though is where the law is an ass.  By what logic does a man have any obligation whatever, particularly in this age now when women get the plumb jobs and are virtually guaranteed work, to pay her anything at all once they part?

Let’s imagine she married him and had a little nest egg of her own.  He was a high-flier or became one and behind every successful man there’s a good woman, they say.  No dispute so far from me.   Not just that but she does have the right to say she contributed to the increase in “their” fortune – I read something somewhere about two people “running” companies.

Now that is the family business.  OK, if she decides to leave that business, it’s exactly the same as a high-flying employee leaving the company.  For example, our Marissa can’t expect Google to keep her in the lifestyle to which she’s become accustomed.   She’s entitled to  a one time payout and that’s that.   Or maybe it was all his doing but she claims housekeeping and domestic service.  Again, a lump sum.

The very notion that an ex-wife can keep her daughters at a prestigious school is ridiculous if it’s based on his money.  The woman’s moved on, she might have married another high-flier, she might not.  It’s her issue now, it’s out of his control and the daughters were given to her.  The ex-hubby’s obligations have ceased.   If he subsequently loses his entire fortune in some bad business moves, what’s that to us, what’s that to her?

Things like this happen to people all the time, families adjust to it, they downgrade, the children go to a local school.   If she manages to find another mug, all well and good – the children can continue at the prestigious school.  If she can’t rig up a deal, then they don’t.  Simple.   His only obligation is to ensure the children aren’t destitute and are fed and clothed, otherwise he should call in the authorities on her.   He should spend what time he can with them too so at least they get some vestiges of two parents bringing them up.

Most people would accept that the business of the State, if it has any at all, would include protecting and looking after abandoned children.

And that’s it.

There are two more points – the feminist induced no-fault divorce and who actually filed.   No-fault divorce is the worst thing to have happened because it excuses her behaviour completely.   It technically excuses behaviour by both parties.   So, in fault-based divorce, it’s critical who filed and for what reason.   If violence by him is alleged, he has the right to detail how she provoked it – what steps she took over a period of time and all of it, the whole thing, is taken into account.

If he was having it away with his secretary, that also comes into it.  If she had a fancy man on the side, that comes into it.   When the whole sordid story comes out in court [which can be behind closed doors], leaving each parent to divulge what they will later, it’s pretty clear who was to blame and whether filing for divorce was overkill or not.   The financial killing either party stands to make must also come into it.

Now, if, after all of that, he does come out as the cad who constantly beat his wife and raped his children, then he pays out big, bigger than anything mentioned so far.   But if it was nothing like presented by her, then she’s told “on yer bike”, except of course for reasonable child support, i.e. the minimum required to keep a child above poverty.   If he decides to continue paying for the school, then that’s out of his love for his kids.  His business.   Similarly, if she decides to contribute over and above the minimum, that’s her affair.

That’s the way it should be, not this abomination at present called “beat the father”.   And that’s why fathers who are ousted from the marital home with the State’s collusion are taking the attitude they are.  And that’s one major reason men are not committing. More than one father has said it and I say it too – once that divorce has gone through:

Not one penny more.

13 Responses to “Not one penny more …”

  1. Ian Hills January 16, 2013 at 23:24 Permalink

    Some very good points, James, which also highlight rising institutional sexism against men.

    http://britain-today.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/marriage-and-profit.html

  2. CherryPie January 16, 2013 at 23:44 Permalink

    the feminist induced no-fault divorce and who actually filed

    I stated the only legitimate reasons for divorce on your post a few days ago.

    I did also comment on what I thought about the law and settlement between the two parties.

    Stop being so sensationalist, and think!

    The way you talk leads to becoming one of ‘them’ and not one of ‘us’…

  3. Amfortas January 16, 2013 at 23:50 Permalink

    Sensationalist, Cherry? Shaming tactic ahoy.

  4. James Higham January 16, 2013 at 23:50 Permalink

    The males agree. The female disagrees. Night follows day.

    Cherie, I agree that one should not sensationalize, so what is the situation?

    ………..

    2010 report carried by the major dailies:

    The number of women convicted of domestic violence in England and Wales has more than doubled in the last five years.

    Nearly 4,000 women were successfully prosecuted last year, compared with fewer than 1,500 in 2005.
    And the data suggests that women are becoming more violent, as the number of females as a proportion of all men and women convicted rose from five per cent to seven per cent.

    In fact, official figures show that the number of women convicted of perpetrating domestic abuse has quadrupled in the past six years, from 806 in 2004-2005 to 3,494 in 2009-2010.

    And although women are twice as likely to be victims of domestic abuse, men are much less likely to come forward.

    Twice as many male victims (41 per cent) as women (19 per cent) do not tell anyone about the domestic abuse they are suffering, according to the British Crime Survey.

    More than 55,000 men were prosecuted in 2010, compared with around 28,700 five years earlier.

    A CPS spokesman said the service  does support male victims of domestic violence.
    He added: ‘There is no bias or lack of concern on the part of the CPS when dealing with cases involving male victims.’

    The figures will add to a growing body  of evidence that women are becoming more violent.
    In 2009, official figures revealed that the number of women found guilty of murder, vicious assault and other attacks had risen by 81 per cent since 1998

    Erin Pizzey in a survey conducted among women using her Chiswick based refuge, discovered that 64% of them had violently abused their spouses.

    This was a typical comment on the issue at various sites:

    “This happened to my present husband in his last marriage, and he is a very long way from being a wimp. What he says now is that if he hadn’t got out when he did – to come to me – either he’d have been dead, or she would be, and he’d be serving a life sentence.

    In other words, if she hadn’t killed him by any other means he’d be dead because his Type II diabetes went out of control from stress. Or, he’d have finally flipped and killed her. As he’s a strong guy he could have done that easily. The times he nearly dumped her at the roadside when she wouldn’t stop nagging him in the car, the times he nearly walked away and left her on her own in the supermarket with the shopping.”

    ………..

    What is significant is that whenever the topic comes up and this has only been from around 2010, the comments threads are inundated with men detailing how it’s done by the women and some women are found in there too, usually married to men who had been previously abused.

    I find that most significant that another woman will accept and defend him.

    On the other hand, feminists form groups to quote stats to deny this is happening:

    Women Wrongfully Accused of Domestic Violence – Care2
    http://www.care2.com/c2c/group/WWADV – Cached – Similar
    Women Wrongfully Accused of Domestic Violence: We are a group of women
    who have been or have a loved one acuused of Domestic Violence by the abuser.

    As I said in the post, I don’t have current personal experience of this so I’m looking on and trying to get to the bottom of it. It’s clear that men are not being heard on the issue and the state doesn’t wish to know. 50 000 against 3500 still has men as the main physical abusers but only now is women’s culpability starting to be also heard, albeit in comments threads.

    This is where all recent major campaigns have sprung from, largely via the internet.

    ………..

    Further reading:

    U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics. Intimate Partner Violence, 1993-2001. Table 2. http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=1001

    Fiebert ML. References Examining Assaults by Women on their Spouses or Male Partners. California State University, 2010. http://www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm

    Archer J. Sex Differences in Aggression Between Heterosexual Partners: A Meta-Analytic Review. Psychological Bulletin Vol. 126, No. 5, 2000.

    Stith S, Smith DB, Penn CE, et al. Intimate partner physical abuse perpetation and victimization risk factors: A meta-analytic review. Aggression and Violent Behavior Vol. 10, 2004. pp. 65-98.

    Department of Justice. Criminal Victimization in the United States, 2007. February 2010. NCJ 227669. Table 35. http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=1743

    Zahnd E, Grant D, Aydin M et al. Nearly Four Million California Adults are Victims of Intimate Partner Violence. Los Angeles, CA: UCLA Center for Health Policy Research, 2010. http://www.healthpolicy.ucla.edu/pubs/Publication.aspx?pubID=402

    ………..

    My comment as ever – one needs to argue from facts rather than from entrenched positions. Cherie, this is not anti-female, it is asking women to accept that something is happening which clearly is happening. Please follow the links.

    The reason for the topic being aired is the same for any other issue raised here – to debunk myths and set the record straight. It will be the same for any other topic.

  5. CherryPie January 17, 2013 at 00:10 Permalink

    Sorry guys I don’t do shaming tactics…

    I don’t differentiate the guys from the girls. Over the years most of my best friends have been guys and we have always had similar thoughts (and agreed on them)…

    My encounters in the blogging world are rather different than what I encounter in my day to day face encounters with people.

    I don’t take kindly to people inferring I am trying to be manipulative (one thing I can never be accused of), dishonest etc. Especially when they haven’t read all my comments and at least tried to understand them.

  6. Amfortas January 17, 2013 at 00:14 Permalink

    If ‘sensationalist’ was not shaming, Cherry, please show how it is an accurate and appropriate description. As for the ‘think’ barb, it seemed to me to be a quite thoughtful piece. Please show how it is not.

    PS. James is about to post an article of mine. I expect some fine flinty words from you. :)

  7. Ian Hills January 17, 2013 at 00:17 Permalink

    Who mentioned “manipulative”, CP?

  8. Amfortas January 17, 2013 at 00:26 Permalink

    Separated by gravity.

    http://www.mercatornet.com/articles/view/a_pro_marriage_oscar_nominee

  9. CherryPie January 17, 2013 at 00:33 Permalink

    @Amfortas

    This post was a good bit of journalism and balanced until it got to this point.
    And that’s it.

    Beyond that point it got to naming and shaming and a little bit skewed… Against the female?

    You said yourself it take two to tango…

    So why the vitriol against the female all the time?

    @Ian

    I am following on from previous posts and comments.

  10. CherryPie January 17, 2013 at 00:59 Permalink

    And the data suggests that women are becoming more violent, as the number of females as a proportion of all men and women convicted rose from five per cent to seven per cent.

    Or does that mean that men now feel able to admit they have been abused physically or mentally by a woman?

    Where do the statistics come from?

    I acknowledge that women are always prone to violence in extreme circumstances as are men.

  11. James Higham January 17, 2013 at 01:08 Permalink

    Where do they come from?

    First lot from the Crown Prosecution Service and subsequent ones from the quoted and linked articles.

    The reader might like to also consider this:

    http://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/abs/10.2105/AJPH.2005.079020

  12. Chrysalis January 17, 2013 at 01:54 Permalink

    I’m confident that James and Cherie can work this out between them, without people taking sides :)

    And I’m certain no one is doing so based on gender, right?

  13. James Higham January 17, 2013 at 11:57 Permalink

    Sure of it.

    Wonder if the new post Thursday will help? :)

Leave a Reply

Please copy the string zeh5AH to the field below: