to wonder about the assumption that a wife is just unhappy so leaves husband but also takes the kids

[tangledweb]

I am a 'relationship' thread addict as my marriage isn't knit of the strongest fibre but i am a bit about the assumption that, just because you don't love your husband anymore, you should leave AND get the kids.

Doesn't that mean that men then have much more of an impetus is trying to keep marriages together than women as they don't just lose their partner but the kids too. It just seems imbalanced and of a selfish presumption to me.

I'm not sure what the answer is but it just seems unfair.

The truly feminist view would be that not everything women do is a reaction to a man, it could just be that she wants something else, surely?

1 in 4 women experiencing DV is reported cases. There's a lot of evidence to suggest it's actually higher than that and that the emotional/financial abuse is ignored

In an attempt to give serious things more publicity, lobbyists "big them up" but IMO then make 3 major errors in the process - firstly they extend the definition of X until it's very watered down, secondly push definitions of X into areas which are far harder to prove, and thirdly add a huge "not reported" amount to bump it up.

I know its done for the best of intentions, but I think it has the worst of outcomes as the majority of people then just don't believe the resulting conclusions.

I often wonder why (some) feminists bother with men at all - why do they have even have children? They clearly think men are evil bastards whose only purpose in life is to piss women off. It's so fucking boring.

"what sense would it make for the kids to go to the exH 50% of the time, when in reality that would mean the majority of that time in childcare when dad is working?"

It would enable more women to work FT hours in a decent career, just like single men are able to do. The reality is, single working parents are more dependent on paid childcare than couples who can mutually agree that one parent will take a financial hit in order to do the bulk of the childcare and running two homes instead of one costs a lot more money which has to come from somewhere. Its not reasonable than men can continue to earn without having childcare responsibilities whilst women struggle to find school hours jobs or stay out of employment. Single mothers should be allowed to try to avoid entering old age in poverty and single fathers should realise that employing an after school childminder and finishing early in order to get the dcs to their dentist appointment is part of being a single working parent.

Don't attribute all the views on this thread to feminists. The feminists I know tend to separate and share 50:50 childcare with their exes. It often works quite well.

Minus, the comment below:
So are women who's husbands leave them supposed to have their children taken away?

how the fuck did you get to that interpretations??? baffled, really.....

TWO WORDS: SHARED CUSTODY

simple

I don't think all men are evil bastards I just think that automatically favouring the man is not helpful. Its certainly not helpful to assume the woman must be lying about abuse which tbh the system does now. Perhaps not the relationship threads on MN but the legal system certainly does.

Poor ickle men. Always so hard done by

When you live in fear every day of your life and when every time your child sees their father they are told vile and abusive things yet you are legally forced to continue handing her over then it kind of prejudices your opinion. Every day I face the chance of never seeing DD again. Trust me it's not a nice way to live and all because he has all the rights. Trust me its not a nice way to live.

No one is automatically favouring the male, hence the thread. Just pointing out it may not be fair to automatically favour the female or assume bad behaviour on the part of the male.

Just remember that men made the rules. And now we're feeling bad about it!

The primary carer "gets" the children. Or rather, the children's stability is maintained by the primary carer continuing to be the primary carer. If men wish to "get" the children, then guess what they need to do?

The spouse most fit to give proper care to the children should get the children. Even if a father works full time and the mother is a stay at home mom, it doesn't necessarily mean she should get the children. My aunt and uncle divorced when I was young and, by default, my aunt got the children even though she was the worst possible mother you could possibly want. Out all hours with different men every night, selfish, emotionally abusive to the children. Whereas my uncle loved the children to bits, and they were constantly running away to his house. My uncle fought for custody for two years before he was finally granted it, and only after the youngest developed problems from shaken baby syndrome. Even then it was only partial custody. How is that fair?

the feminist claptrap on here has made my day, can now go out with a chuckle and a snigger

would love my H to have shared custody. But I have 5 children and we can't afford 2 houses/flats that will sleep them all.

also not sure H wants shared custody! so far I've asked him to have the children one evening in the week, and he's said he can't guarantee that he can do it every week! wtf!! (I don't have that option).

also not 100% sure that 50% of time in one house and 50% in another is what is best for the children. Perhaps what you need is one house where the children stay all the time and then each parent has a studio flat that they live in when it isn't their turn to have the children. Need to be fairly rich I suppose.

I guess Id make op happy then. Im miserable in my marriage but with no money or family I have nowhere to go, and H refuses to leave. So the children get to stay in their home and I get to slowly disappear until there is nothing left of me. But its only "generic unhappiness" so I expect I deserve it.

If the father wants 50-50 Don't work full time and the mother give up her job.

Both work part-time or both work full-time.

But do mothers want his?

Eh? I work full time, why the hell wouldn't/couldn't I get full time custody?

(As it happens I would never make the presumption I'd 'get' the kids as it doesn't work like that, but also if I was to split with my dh we'd go for 50:50)

There are some peculiar misunderstandings on this thread about feminism, that's for sure.

The feminist position on this is that the way society is shaped, benefits neither sex and it certainly doesn't benefit children. Hence, you can't isolate the issue raised in the OP, without taking into account that women who leave and become the non-resident parent are more vilified by society than male NRPs. Or that men fear leaving unhappy relationships because they don't want to live apart from their children. Or that men who are left by women for someone else, lose more than just their marriage. Or that women who've subjugated their independence to raising a family often get left holding the babies, in reduced financial circumstances.

If on the other hand, society were constructed so that both parents shared work and parenting more evenly and neither partner lost their financial independence after having children - with shared residence/parenting the norm and no sexist assumptions about women being better for children than men, then everyone would benefit.

and if both work FT? still think shared custody is better

look noone is saying "favour the man", and noone is saying its easy to leave relationships. and I hate it when women are told "leave him" as fuck knows in this climate its not easy to set up 2 homes!

But it still saddens me that some loving dads see their kids every other weekend, really does

anyway, at some stage kids go to school anyway! so the whole "primary carer" think well how does that work then????

Wouldn't the most sensible way to settle it be to ask the children what they want to do?

You know, the ones who will have their lives most disrupted? Assuming they're of an age where they understand what is going on, of course.

Personally, my dad was a physically and emotionally abusive twat to all of us during their 15 year marriage. I wouldn't have thanked some gormless bastard for IMPOSING 50/50 custody onto me, the child in the relationship when my mum finally left him when I was 11.

I left my marriage and my child after an experience of bereavement so sorrowful that i had cause to question the continuation of my own life.

I wasn't able to gain any support from my (now ex) husband and our marriage ended.

He was and continues to be the best person to care for my child, now with his new wife and has an immense and loving extended family which i was unable to provide or participate in.

My child has been able to continue to have his own home, school and friends and have retired grandparents to provide care along with father and stepmum and who have shown me gratitude for being 'big enough' to put our child's well-being above my own selfish needs (which i readily admit to feeling).

My child is by far the best thing in my life. I completely understand how high the emotions of non-resident fathers can run. I pay my share towards my childs upkeep through CSA who have been very unfeeling about my circumstances but I realize they are merely looking at a computer screen, not the person.

Every relationship breakdown has its own story.

Ime the children often want the parents to stay together.

montepulcian

thanks for sharing that, very brave and very sorrowful too, bless you