There is a new thread at CF that gets into divorce incentive and jailing of men for child support.
Only one woman posted, and while hers is actually a mild rebuttal compared to what most make on that forum, it needs to be pointed out, again, and everytime it happens, that
YOUR PERSONAL ANECDOTES DO NOT MEAN ANYTHING IN A DISCUSSION OF THE OVERALL STATE OF MARRIAGE IN THE UNITED STATES
Ive decided that the number one thing blocking reasoned discourse at any level in this country on matters of family law is the seeming inability women demonstrate to separate the big picture and the statistics that inform it from what happened to them or their sisters and friends.
There are no incentives for no fault divorce. I know women who have gotten no relief from the support collection system.
Can she and others not understand that I could say “there is no harm from smoking, my uncle smoked 4 packs a day and lived very healthy until 95 and died in a car wreck”?
Sorry…there ARE incentives. I will grant that things rarely work out rosy on the average divorce, and women do not wind up better off. That’s not what is being said. There can be a PERCEIVED incentive that in reality doesn’t manifest. My anecdotal stories all show that the women thought life would be exactly the same post divorce, minus the jerk, and usually during the few months of the divorce process that bears out. Then comes the final date, and those pesky lawyers that were all about status quo start talking about silly things like arithmetic. “Here is the income, and here are the needs, so here is what we need to do, even if the guy lives in an efficiency apartment and uses public transport, there is only X available, so some things need to be sold, etc etc. ”
At this point the woman panics and attempts to reconcile or to prolong the drama by trying to get the state to proclaim for the record that their husband is an asshole. The courts are busy, they end it, and she faces a diminished lifestyle. She then blames the man for that and lashes out again and again for years.
If 84% of the time women getting custody of kids is NOT an incentive, perhaps we need to explain the term incentive. That is incentive enough usually. That dads either cannot or do not pay doesn’t speak to whether there is or is not an incentive. The incentive is that they will be ordered to pay.
She falls into accusations of men wanting out of obligations because they are pointing out the injustice. This bold faced Kafka trap is tiresome. Only white knight men are falling for the false guilt of these pedestrian rhetorical tricks that have become instinctive in the American woman.
She goes on to say
Talk to women, particularly those with children, who have been through divorce. Ask them why they divorced. Ask them if they struggled to raise children on their own or if their life was the bed of roses that you seem to picture
here’s the thing…first, nobody has “been through” a divorce. They either filed a divorce, or had one filed, or the couple agreed to file. Divorce isn’t a sentient thing acting independently. We needn’t ask them why they divorced, we already know why. While we may not know why one specific woman divorced, we do know why the majority of women divorce, and we know there is an entire newly minted vocabulary just for elevating trivial reasons to no brainers….see ____________abuse (fill in blank as needed). Finally, no one in the thread said its a bed of roses, most would cede its quite the opposite. She needs to understand that incentive is what exists before the action is taken….the reality after has no bearing. Perhaps if women were willing to be outspoken against divorce they would do more good protecting the interests of women. But in a fit of cognitive dissonance women both argue for easy divorce, and decry its outcomes knowing the the very best and safest place for a woman and children is in the married home of the original parents.
I can only hope that somewhere along the road these women know someone whose sons have been ruined by these system. THEN and only then she can do what, in a perverse reversal of reality, she says we men need to do:
I think it would be helpful for people to learn empathy for the opposite sex
I agree. And until women read and learn to understand that reality isn’t defined by one’s personal anecdotes for purposes of examining fairness, they will not have empathy for men.