ADVERTISEMENT

View Poll Results: Thoughts...

Voters
67. You may not vote on this poll
  • I agree completely

    0 0%
  • I sort of agree

    6 8.96%
  • I disagree

    61 91.04%
+ Reply to Thread
Page 14 of 23 FirstFirst ... 41213141516 ... LastLast
Results 131 to 140 of 224
  1. #131
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    19,776
    Thanks
    5,212
    Thanked
    7,064
    Reviews
    1
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 postsRuby Star - 15,000 posts
    In some countries the children automatically go to the father, no matter the circumstances (mostly Islamic countries from what I've read).

    I think there's a very deep-seated idea that child-raising is "women's work". This has been caused by patriarchy, NOT feminism. Feminists are trying to change this which would open more doors for fathers to play a more active role in their children's lives.

  2. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Benji For This Useful Post:

    Annabella  (20-04-2012),GuestMember  (20-04-2012),MamaC  (21-04-2012),MissMuppet  (20-04-2012),shelle65  (20-04-2012)

  3. #132
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    441
    Thanks
    136
    Thanked
    113
    Reviews
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Lovemyfam View Post
    There are things I don't agree with like in the US I'll use my brother for example he got a divorce he then had to pay 4000 in CS and another 3000 in alimony to his ex who was not working when they met he also had had his daughters full time but when thu got the divorce she was was to keep the kids. He could not afford to go to court to show he had the kids it's pretty common over there that by default the mother gets the kids as in his case since she was the primary care giver. So he sent her 7k a month for years until he could afford I go to court how is this right?

    I think that in some ways women do have more rights than men and it's wrong.

    Do you mean that it's wrong because she wasn't working when they met? I don't want to get bogged down in a family law argument ( I avoid family law like the plague) but those payments are meant to cover the fact that through raising their children she won't be able to acquire savings, superannuation, career advancement etc.

    I don't know your brother's situation, and 7k a month is a LOT to have to come up with, plus havign to also support yourself, but I think that is the reason that alimony is paid. For example, if I gave up work when I have this baby to raise it, and the other two that I want, and my DP and I separate at the end of 7 years, duting which time he has gone on to become a brilliant rich barrister because I have been able to take up all the picking up, running around, time consuming stuff, plus putting my own legal career on hold, that allowed him to work the long hours that made him successful, then I would expect financial compensation because I have equity in his career.

    If we did it the other way around, as a friend of mine and her husband do, and he stays at home while she has become extremely successful and well off, and then separated then I would expect to have to give him the same equity in my financial success.

    Does that make sense? The idea breaks my heart though, even thinking about it (pregnant hormonal lady)
    Last edited by Artful; 20-04-2012 at 12:56.

  4. #133
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    2,993
    Thanks
    1,382
    Thanked
    2,879
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Benji View Post
    In some countries the children automatically go to the father, no matter the circumstances (mostly Islamic countries from what I've read).

    I think there's a very deep-seated idea that child-raising is "women's work". This has been caused by patriarchy, NOT feminism. Feminists are trying to change this which would open more doors for fathers to play a more active role in their children's lives.
    Yea Benj, as usual, excellent points. It's not feminism that's assuming the mother would be better to raise the children. I know of two examples where the mother has opted to have the father be primary carer. The horror they receive at their choices is quite shocking. "A ***** never leaves her pups", is the phrase I heard a few times. It seems women again can't win. Take the kids and you're emasculating men. Leave the kids and there's something wrong with you.

  5. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Alexander Beetle For This Useful Post:

    Benji  (20-04-2012),MissMuppet  (20-04-2012),shelle65  (20-04-2012)

  6. #134
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    23,366
    Thanks
    6,428
    Thanked
    17,966
    Reviews
    10
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 postsRuby Star - 15,000 postsDiamond Star - 20,000 posts
    Awards:
    Bubhub Blogger - Thanks100 Posts in a week
    Quote Originally Posted by Benji View Post
    I think there's a very deep-seated idea that child-raising is "women's work". This has been caused by patriarchy, NOT feminism. Feminists are trying to change this which would open more doors for fathers to play a more active role in their children's lives.
    best comment so far if you want to blame someone for the fact women automatically get the kids (which I don't believe, it seems in the US 50/50 custody is much more common than here but anyhoo) blame patriachy.

    Many feminists argue child rearing is only women's work bc that's how society has evolved, not bc women are always the best carers. Many argue than men can be equally good if not better primary carers in individual cases.... we seek not just to free women from stereotypes but men also

  7. The Following User Says Thank You to delirium For This Useful Post:

    Benji  (20-04-2012)

  8. #135
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    1,700
    Thanks
    358
    Thanked
    503
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Lovemyfam View Post
    There are things I don't agree with like in the US I'll use my brother for example he got a divorce he then had to pay 4000 in CS and another 3000 in alimony to his ex who was not working when they met he also had had his daughters full time but when thu got the divorce she was was to keep the kids. He could not afford to go to court to show he had the kids it's pretty common over there that by default the mother gets the kids as in his case since she was the primary care giver. So he sent her 7k a month for years until he could afford I go to court how is this right?

    I think that in some ways women do have more rights than men and it's wrong.
    If he is paying 7 k a month either americas system is queer or he earns a great deal of money.


    Ds's father pays 140 per month on an income estimate of 2400 per month
    Sent from my MB526 using BubHub

  9. #136
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    23,366
    Thanks
    6,428
    Thanked
    17,966
    Reviews
    10
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 postsRuby Star - 15,000 postsDiamond Star - 20,000 posts
    Awards:
    Bubhub Blogger - Thanks100 Posts in a week
    Quote Originally Posted by Nemmi View Post
    If he is paying 7 k a month either americas system is queer or he earns a great deal of money.
    I was thinking that. That I'm aware the US is means tested as oz is. Therefore he would have to be earning a huge amount to pay 7k a month.

    The US is also big on spousal support. Where the woman doesn't work in the marriage and therefore has no super and less propensity to be able to find work straight away after the marriage ends given she's been out so long.

  10. #137
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    2,567
    Thanks
    1,023
    Thanked
    511
    Reviews
    1
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Artful View Post
    Do you mean that it's wrong because she wasn't working when they met? I don't want to get bogged down in a family law argument ( I avoid family law like the plague) but those payments are meant to cover the fact that through raising their children she won't be able to acquire savings, superannuation, career advancement etc.

    I don't know your brother's situation, and 7k a month is a LOT to have to come up with, plus havign to also support yourself, but I think that is the reason that alimony is paid. For example, if I gave up work when I have this baby to raise it, and the other two that I want, and my DP and I separate at the end of 7 years, duting which time he has gone on to become a brilliant rich barrister because I have been able to take up all the picking up, running around, time consuming stuff, plus putting my own legal career on hold, that allowed him to work the long hours that made him successful, then I would expect financial compensation because I have equity in his career.

    If we did it the other way around, as a friend of mine and her husband do, and he stays at home while she has become extremely successful and well off, and then separated then I would expect to have to give him the same equity in my financial success.

    Does that make sense? The idea breaks my heart though, even thinking about it (pregnant hormonal lady)
    Yes it's because she wasn't working when they met so she didn't quit a job to raise kids is why I think it is wrong

  11. #138
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    2,567
    Thanks
    1,023
    Thanked
    511
    Reviews
    1
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Benji View Post
    In some countries the children automatically go to the father, no matter the circumstances (mostly Islamic countries from what I've read).

    I think there's a very deep-seated idea that child-raising is "women's work". This has been caused by patriarchy, NOT feminism. Feminists are trying to change this which would open more doors for fathers to play a more active role in their children's lives.
    Thanks for clearing that up for me

  12. #139
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    2,567
    Thanks
    1,023
    Thanked
    511
    Reviews
    1
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by delirium;[/quote

    The US is also big on spousal support. Where the woman doesn't work in the marriage and therefore has no super and less propensity to be able to find work straight away after the marriage ends given she's been out so long.
    But its not hard or a problem as some here state because they said in another thread staying home until your last one is 6(I think ) is no problem so not sure which it is.

    He didn't earn a lot it's because he owned his own business which made income but after paying taxes, employees etc he didn't bring home a ton so he struggled to pay this and raise his daughters which saw mom maybe 1 a month thank god it's all cleared up he has his kids and no longer pay support he also never asked her for it so it worked out.

  13. #140
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    23,366
    Thanks
    6,428
    Thanked
    17,966
    Reviews
    10
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 postsRuby Star - 15,000 postsDiamond Star - 20,000 posts
    Awards:
    Bubhub Blogger - Thanks100 Posts in a week
    But its not hard or a problem as some here state because they said in another thread staying home until your last one is 6(I think ) is no problem so not sure which it is.

    Not sure what you mean here, can you clarify?

    Australia doesn't really pay spousal support bc our govt provides benefits. If the children were small she would get SPP and TFB. If they were over 6 she would be put on Newstart or Austudy with FTB until she found work.


 

Similar Threads

  1. What are all your thoughts on....
    By Brandnewbeginnings in forum General Parenting Tips, Advice & Chat
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 27-02-2012, 13:50
  2. What are your thoughts on this?
    By OS&N in forum General Chat
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 01-02-2012, 17:34
  3. Thoughts
    By Buttoneska in forum Conception & Fertility General Chat
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 06-01-2012, 21:54

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

FEATURED SUPPORTER
L'il Aussie Prems FoundationAn Australian charity supporting families of premature babies & children. The charity assists families who are at high ...
REVIEWS
"Made bed time less anxious"
by Meld85
My Little Heart Whisbear - the Humming Bear reviews ›
"Wonderful natural Aussie made product!"
by Mrstwr
Baby U Goat Milk Moisturiser reviews ›
"Replaced good quality with cheap tight nappies"
by Kris
Coles Comfy Bots Nappies reviews ›

ADVERTISEMENT