Nex time you decide to post a question with such a broad sweeping generaliztion, why not post some statistics that support it. 85 percent of those in poverty are women and children.
The law doesn't favour the woman. When you consider that most men want their children to remain in the care of the wife then this explains the idea of asset equalization. This is to protect the welfare of the children, and the fact for many years women supported their husbands through training and education that allowed them to have high paying positions. The constitution doesn't even recognize women so there goes your theory down the toilet.
2007-03-17 03:31:27
·
answer #1
·
answered by Deirdre O 7
·
1⤊
3⤋
It seems that a similar question to this is posted at least once a day so I will say what I always say... When you promise to be with someone until death parts you -- you have an obligation to this person. There are cases that women have come out on the short end although I do realize it is far less common because it is often viewed as an unmasculine role. Women are often favored because they are more likely to put family ahead of work (taking time off for children, planning a life around the husbands work, etc) and deserve compensation, and marriage assets belong to the couple (no matter who the paycheck is made out to). There is also the option of a pre-nuptial agreement.
2007-03-17 09:36:24
·
answer #2
·
answered by ecogeek4ever 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
Next time you post a statistic, Dierdre, provide some reasons WHY it's accurate. (I.e., a SOURCE.)
"85 percent of those in poverty are women and children."
Because they aren't WORKING. Some women take the children and then want welfare. Big surprise. You can't POSSIBLY be using this to generalize and say how women are disadvantaged, can you? Certainly no one would be so ignorant, in light of statistics like these:
http://www.coeffic.demon.co.uk/descrim.htm
http://christianparty.net/discmen.htm
Just two sources to chew on for a while. They may not be completely accurate, and it's (quite) possible that they're biased, but the same could be said for any feminist statistic thrown out.
The law certainly favors women in general; consider family courts and the justice system.
2007-03-17 10:49:58
·
answer #3
·
answered by Robinson0120 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
You want to know what I think? It is okay that the law favours women a bit. They are WEAKER and because none has ever raised an objection to this favour, they agree. But the day they begin to "measure heights" with their superiors, we'll change the law. Thank you.
2007-03-17 09:29:11
·
answer #4
·
answered by Demuvi E 1
·
1⤊
0⤋
No in fact women should get more perks in a divorce untill men finally wise up and dont marry forcing women to keep their bf happy if they want a lasting relationship. Eventually finally girls will then have good rolemodels again instead of those grrrl power do whatever you want and find a sucker to pick up the check women.
2007-03-17 09:54:36
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
with equality this should mean everybody is treated the same so why should wowman be in favour by the law why should wowman be treated beter than men but i believe after a divorce that who ever gets the children to look after should get the most
2007-03-17 09:30:53
·
answer #6
·
answered by queenbea 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
Now that's what I find funny...feminists will play the weak woman to get what they want, yet pride themselves on being strong women.
Which is it?
And yes the law favors women. Think VAWA.
2007-03-17 11:59:34
·
answer #7
·
answered by ? 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
each case should b judged in a court of law based on its own merits not under an umbrella like ur holding
2007-03-17 09:24:51
·
answer #8
·
answered by mmbmw2000 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
YES
In the following areas: military service, child custody, criminal cases, spousal abuse.
2007-03-19 19:20:18
·
answer #9
·
answered by Hoyt 1
·
1⤊
0⤋
at divorce time-yes. At other times they get breaks also, get used to it.
2007-03-17 09:21:08
·
answer #10
·
answered by sowhat 3
·
1⤊
1⤋