After pushing for no-fault divorce, isn't it hypocritical .....?

Question

to then warn women to carefully plan their lives with the expectation of divorce? No-fault divorce was supported in large part by feminists (and also divorce lawyers, LOL).

They fully admitted that the point of no-fault divorce was to make sure women understood that "marriage was no longer a viable career choice." It would "demand the achievement of autonomy". (feminist sociologist Jessie Bernard "The Future of Marriage")

So now that we have accomplished the goal of scaring women into working fulltime in case of divorce, how can feminists pretend to feel pity for these women? How can they go from trying to force women to abandon being a housewife, under threat of poverty, to warning that it is a dangerous choice? It wouldn't BE as dangerous if they hadn't fought for no-fault divorce.

How can feminists attempt to manipulate women into making certain choices but then pretend to support ALL women?

I agree that no-fault divorce was promoted with largely good intentions - for women who were being abused, for one matter. Perhaps divorce *should* be a private matter. There are pros and cons both ways. But PART of its' support came from feminists who were thrilled to see the end of "marriage as a career", even though this was blatant manipulation. I find this morally questionable.

Betty Friedan said in 1987: "We fell into a trap when we said, 'no alimony', 'no-fault divorce', because housewives who were divorced fell into terrible straights." She clearly recognizes the consequences to women of these laws. So, how can other advocates for women not put two and two together?

EDIT to Rio: That was the point of no-fault divorce - to blatantly manipulate women into making their own money, "for their own good". I don't think that's right.

Proffesor, you are reading way too much into this question if you think it's a "thinly veiled attack" on working women. My MOM was a working woman. Why would I attack them? I love my Mom! LOL If you don't want to talk about women's studies, don't answer my questions. If you want to hear an echo, go cave diving.

Answer 1

What no-fault divorce did was make it easier for WOMEN to initiate divorce. Under either system, they could end up in poverty, unless, obviously, they had planned for every contingency. Feminism aside, marriage is only a viable career choice for a few lucky women; you can't depend on a husband anymore. More women have learned this too late than those who haven't had to.

Besides, what's so bad about autonomy? The alternative is to be dependent. Is it practical for one adult to be dependent on another?

Women should carefully plan their lives no matter what services are available to them. I don't think you'd expect a stay-at-home dad to abandon all assets that are solely his and see how things turn out.

EDIT: Support came from all kinds of people. Maybe some non-feminist men supported it so they didn't have to provide for their wives anymore.

EDIT: Had those housewives been encouraged to maintain their financial independence, their straits wouldn't have been as dire.

EDIT: It didn't necessarily mean sending them to work. They could have kept all the money they'd gotten on their own from their single years in their own name and left it in the bank to generate interest. That would have left them with some money with which to start over.

Answer 2

In my mind what makes a Christian in the Bible Belt or elsewhere a hypocrite is stuff like spouting hatred for gays and lesbians. Promoting the murder of doctors who perform abortions, and in the same breath advocating capital punishment. Things like that and insisting that the only people who will go to Heaven are Bible-thumping Christians like themselves. It has a lot to do with how they were raised, prejudice and ignorance. Some of the things you've cited can be blamed on poverty. Ironic, isn't it, that many of the hypocrites scream and yell about the breakdown of the family unit, and they blame liberals for that. I have a question for those people: "Which couple has family values, a young heterosexual couple who opt to have no children and not adopt, or a gay couple who adopts a child?"

Answer 3

What would you rather have? No-fault divorce or abandonment? At least with this kind of divorce, the person not earning an income gets half of all the assets plus child support or alimony, if needed. In the days before no-fault divorce became common, it was not at all unusual for husbands to simply walk out on their families and disappear for good. A lot of families ended up being destitute because of that and little or nothing was done to go after the men who did it.

Answer 4

Divorce is only one reaosn why I believe all women should gain the skills needed to be self-sufficient if necessary. Illness, long time disability due to injuries, death of a spouse, or never finding spouse are also reasons why this has always made sense to me.

I have career, but do not work for pay outside of my home at this point. However, I know that I am fully capable of being autonomous should I need to be, as are both of my daughters.

Marriage should happen because it is the choice of both people; not as a career path, imo.

Answer 5

In very simple terms, there is no fault marriage, any two people who are in lust can be married. There should be no fault divorce for the same reason. Any two people who are married and discover there is no love should be able to be divorced as easily as it was to get married.

Answer 6

no fault divorce made it easier for women in bad situations to file for divorce, and at the same time made divorce *slightly* more equitable for men (they won't be punished if found at fault)

i think it's wrong for one adult to be fully supported by another, even after divorce. it should be equal.

and divorce is not the only reason for women to have a careful plan to support themselves--disability or death of the sole breadwinner can put the whole family in a tight spot.
it's just sound financial advice for anyone to have a back up plan that will help them in case of tragedy.

Answer 7

You make it sound as though feminists came up with the idea. They supported the idea. Judges and lawyers were appalled that they were now allowing and helping people to purger themselves on the stand (in order to prove "fault" women would lie and claim their husbands beat them). They felt it diminished the integrity of the justice system.

I don't try to force my beliefs on anyone. I don't tell anyone that they "have" to work. If you want to be a SAHM, and can afford to be one, by all means, be one. I do believe, however, that everyone should have an education or skills set that they can rely on in case something happens. What if the husband dies, gets hurt, or loses his job?

Answer 8

Feminists will fight til the end to not look bad... and when backed into a corner, you will here the popular phrase "You can't blame everything wrong on Feminism".
It's apparent that the divorce rates are as high as they are. Now you have female supremacy, which is the way feminists like it.

Consider this:

- Women initiate 75% of divorces.

- Women get custody nearly 80% of the time.

- 40% of mothers reported that they had interfered with the fathers visitation to punish their ex-spouse.
["Frequency of Visitation" by Sanford Braver, American Journal of Orthopsychiatry]

- 50% of mothers see no value in the fathers continued contact with his children.
["Surviving the Breakup" by Joan Berlin Kelly]

This is simply anti-male "equality".

Edit: I know my answer is not completely relevant to forcing women to have to work, but is still relevant to the change in the laws.

I'm not too concerned with women working or staying home because no one is marrying anymore anyways and most of the ones that did, are getting divorced.
So, the issue of women working, is solely a woman's issue at this point.

Answer 9

There No-fault divorce was supprted BY lots of people who saw what problems 'fault' divorce battles were. Fault divorce MADE WOMEN AND MEN stay in bad relatiobships.

I am really tired of veiled questions that insult women who choose to work. We do not insult women who choose to stay at home. Women aren't scared into working fulltime. They work because they want to and feel the best way to provide for their families needs is to work outside the home.

Answer 10

I don't know where you are getting all these ideas from but you are dead wrong. How can you blame feminists for everything that goes wrong in this world from political climate to the economy to a man walking out on his wife to take up with another woman. Not only do you sound paranoid but you also sound pretty resentful and hateful towards anyone who doesn't share your opinion.