Absolutely. Women have to pay alimony to their ex-husbands all the time now, so why shouldn't this guy have to pay alimony to his former wife? The person's sexual reassignment should have nothing to do with it.
2006-10-09 12:47:22
·
answer #1
·
answered by ChiChi 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
Wow, this is complicated. I think the person has basically not kept to their role in the marriage and should not expect support. Let's take a same sex scenario. If a woman was married to another woman (let's say the US recognized this marriage) and one was changed into a man, the woman who's intent was to marry and live with a woman should not have to support him. I feel that in the event of the change of gender and/or sexual preference means a person is not invested in the marriage. I am not making a value judgment here, but simply saying that the person would no longer be married to the person they married. The partner who made the change should not then be supported financially by the other in this event.
Eunnie, I thought about your point of the separation prior to divorce; you make a valid point and granted I know nothing of the case except what the poster here asked. If we are talking about a displaced homemaker here or someone who left because of abuse, neglect, violence, etc...yes I would agree, but outside of these possibilities, I respectfully would have to disagree with you.
If a person has a contract with another person saying they will deliver ice cream for an indefinite period and they completely stop manufacturing icecream, instead going into the tire business and wanting to leave and be supported on the basis of an agreement they made to provide ice cream. They should not be supported. My question then becomes why did the couple separate? Was the husband mistreating the wife? Or did the wife decide she was not happy being a woman and being with a man. If this is the case, did she just decide to leave him?
I feel if two people enter into a contract to be a couple, emotionally, financially and sexually and one or the other left to pursue any or all of these elements somewhere or with someone else, I think it nullifies the marriage. If a person values sexuality as an important part of a marriage and their partner changes genders, that person should not be expected to change their sexual/affection orientation or preference.Nor should they pay if, in fact they are being deserted. I would even argue that this would be grounds for an anullment.
2006-10-09 12:40:44
·
answer #2
·
answered by ValleyViolet 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
As with soooo many questions here on Yahoo, this depends entirely on circumstances.
The sex change issue is irrelevant.
The issue is alimony, which is always something that must be looked at on a case-by-case basis.
I think that alimony is appropriate in situations where one partner has sacrificed their own career or earning capabilities for the good of the other partner or for the family as a whole. Gender doesn't factor into this at all, aside from the fact that *often* it is a woman who gives up career advancement, or college, etc., to support a husband's goals or raise kids, and is then screwed when he leaves for his secretary. LOL. Okay, that's a stereotype but not horribly far from common.
2006-10-09 12:33:56
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Yes. The man entered into contract of marriage with a person. The fact that the woman changed genders doesn't void that contact, just as changing gender doesn't void your responsibility to repay loans, honor rental agreements, membership in business partnerships, or any other type of contract.
If you say the gender change causes the marriage to be void because you can't marry two same sex individuals, that's faulty logic. The marriage contract occurred first, before the gender change. If anything is voided it's the gender change that's voided by the marriage. (of course that's not legal either, but this is an area of law that's untested)
valleyviolet:
In this particular case you've got it wrong. She began the gender change AFTER separation. The marriage was already over at that point so she was not abandoning the marriage.
2006-10-09 16:16:13
·
answer #4
·
answered by it 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
they were married
the law says they had an agreement
it's the same person, the same personality in a changed body
so what
that doesn't change the law
the alimony laws aren't specific to "only protect the WOMAN"
it's a contract of marriage between 2 people
if the 'husband' had had less money and needed support, no one would say it's because he's "weaker" or less manly.... he's just trying to get used to a new life with less money and all that
so the same applies
2006-10-09 12:44:46
·
answer #5
·
answered by emeraldnoctis 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
What difference does it make if she gets a sex change? A man can receive alimony from an ex-wife so why not from an ex-husband? Unless it was stipulated in the agreement that the woman could not change sex or name, it should stand.
2006-10-09 12:30:21
·
answer #6
·
answered by Kuji 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
women flow through existence ranges and many aspects influence their libidos. do no longer take it in my view. it incredibly is going to purely upload undue tension. at the beginning, I applaud you for doing all the flaws you suggested. Wow, she is fortunate to have such a committed husband. You did no longer point out her age or her well being status. because you 2 as quickly as shared a healthful intercourse existence, she shouldn't harbor any adverse attitudes approximately intercourse itself. each so often, a woman would not sense sexual if she is risky. There are a bunch of underlying clinical subjects that she could have which would be affecting her intercourse tension. motivate her to get a verify-up. If the toddlers are too on the threshold of your mattress room, that would placed a damper on her intercourse tension, too. She's a mommy first. If it fairly is the priority, whisk her away for an overnighter. exchange of environment, without the toddlers, will do wonders. How does she sense approximately her very own physique? Does she sense eye-catching? motivate her to exercising. exercising fairly kicks in a woman's libido. each so often, whilst a woman would not "use it" she loses it. The intercourse tension, I advise. i comprehend i'm that way. My husband has to place tension on me to "get decrease back on the pony" with the point to talk and as quickly as I do, it rekindles sexual emotions as quickly as back. Why no longer ask her to "lay down and take it?" And, somewhat of merely leaping on her bones, have a nighttime of sensual touching, come across her physique slowly...Make it a nighttime purely for her excitement. Her libido desires awakening. How is your marriage in different factors, via ways? Do you have a solid courting otherwise? If there are different issues, truthfully they'll floor interior the mattress room, too. If all is unquestionably, seek for clinical help, counseling and/or...attempt to bounce start up her back. it incredibly is all i desire each so often. My husband acknowledges it as quickly as I say no too frequently. he's a huge spark plug! ;)
2016-12-13 05:16:08
·
answer #7
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
He should still pay alimony. Alimony is a way of paying a wife for the years that she spent raising children, being a housewife, and not developing a career. It doesn't matter if the wife in question is now male or female, because alimony is a way of compensating for the past. The current status is irrelevent.
2006-10-10 04:19:15
·
answer #8
·
answered by dani_kin 6
·
1⤊
2⤋
Well why not? Does the changing of ones gender change the circumstances and need for alimony? I would say if they can prove a need and can convince a judge, then go for it.
2006-10-09 15:54:45
·
answer #9
·
answered by tjnstlouismo 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
It depends if you really need the alimony. If you are supporting children and your husband makes a good living, and you don't , YES
2006-10-09 13:09:39
·
answer #10
·
answered by Black Beauty 2
·
1⤊
0⤋