| eva01beserk said: Thats the main issue here. Most of the cases of unfair divorce setlements tend to happen when the man is the main provider. family courts still favor the mother in most cases, but child support is so miniscule when being compared to alamony when the man is the sole provider. The sole provider has to keep the ex living in a maner in wich they where acostume to, but often thats impossible as the assets are split in half, and the living expenses more than double since each has to live on their own. Like you said, if a man is thinking of getting married, he better make sure they are equal going in. ANd at least both plan on stayinng that way along the years. CUz most often than not, after children, if a man makes a good amount, the mother does not go back to work, so even going in equal terms mid way everything can change. And its not just men. if the women is the sole earner men get alamoney and half the assets. But the problem as men see it is that that this rarely happens and like 98% of th cases is the man who looses since is the norm for the man to be the primary provider. Like you said, or someone else said, marriage is outdated and needs to have huge changes or the marrige rates are gona keep droping every year and divorce rate will keep increasing. I for one will keep on dating with no plans for marriage, since I have to much to loose and dont know if its my taste or just bad luck, but i havent met any women that put any of them on my economic level for me to even feel safe about even living together. |
Divorce rates, at least in the US, according to data from 2015, have been dropping. Of course it also needs to be pointed out that marriage rates are also dropping.
No, this is not some sort of flipping on the perception of marriage by either men or women, or due to positive changes in the current dynamics of marriage, but likely (my own hypothesis) due to an increasing awareness by men of the inherent risks involved in such contracts who actually have the state of mind to do a cost/benefit analysis before signing the contract. Men either know the risks and potential outcomes or they are legally ignorant or emotionally idealistic.
I believe the incentives for women to enter marriage contracts haven't changed, but the drop offs in numbers are likely attributed to the mindset that if women are enabled to pursue careers in fields that give them a sense of fulfilment, marriage isn't really necessary even though this requires women with life incentives typically attributed to men. Inherent female nurturing instincts can be devoted to pets if necessary.
The potential upside of population pools of women who are more dedicated to the idea of pursuing advancement in a career field, is that the general population now has women who have the earning power and careers of men, allowing for potential equitable mergers between men and women. Marriages such as this that end in divorce could hypothetically be resolved with a signing of the documents to take it off the books without costly legal maneuvering to split the assets as presumably, they already had separate accounts along with a smaller joint account for day to day expenses and operations and neither party needs to try to "stick it to the other" out of spite or in an attempt to grab as many comforts and resources as possible from the other.
Of course the problem with this is any professional career woman in such a position would be far less likely to marry before the age of 30 and the decision to have any children will be largely dependent upon where they are in their career, priorities and the ability or willingness to set career aside (even if temporarily) for the other. Sounds just like men except, they have to incubate the baby and presumably take the time off during those initial months following child birth. Either the woman is going to have to place high priority on a child/children (deprioritizing career and advancement), or she is going to have very low incentive for having them, again calling into the question for why such a woman would want a marriage in the first place other than for state mediated companionship. There's no need for it.
