Why are divorce courts heavily favored towards women? And why is saying so so triggering to feminists?

Why are divorce courts heavily favored towards women? And why is saying so so triggering to feminists?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=85vFkiwwTEg&t=1536s
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Because humans are gynocentric by nature and put a larger emphasis on making sure women are safe, happy and secure.

Because females/feminists like being victims. The suggestion that they're not victims in any one area is infuriating to them because all they do is fantasize about being brutalized and victimized.

divorce is for pussies

Divorce should be illegal again, how can a woman say yes to marriage then change her mind? Insanity

because men are cucks and actually signed this shit into law

This. If you truly loved her the only way out would be murder-suicide, not divorce. Some people just have no passion it seems.

How bout that OJ Simpson divorce tho ?

Society is made to destroy traditional families firstly and secondly it alienates men and forces them to contribute the great majority of their work to help protected groups that shouldnt get any special treatment at all.

because women have less natural skills. even niggers can sometimes outsmart women. at least let them do the one thing they are supposed to be good at

Because men used to be the sole providers in their home and the wives had nothing to their name. They really needed the money to survive until they hooked another man

Because they don't want to lose their fail safe because it works every time

Not for much longer.

who's that? she a bit sexy

>And why is saying so so triggering to feminists?
The more evidence there is debunking one of their sacred tenets the louder they squeal.

No, forever. Just look at OP's question, or any other of the plethora of threads made on Sup Forums daily about women.

ITS PAY TO PLAY COURT DONT WANT YOU TO HAVE A EZ BREAK UP OR EQUAL TIME WITH YOUR KIDS ITS A MULTI BILLION DOLLAR SCAM

That plethora of threads about women should itself be telling.

It only takes one fucking crisis and societal collapse to IMMEDIATELY bitchslap women down to their place.

Even conservative judges still give women all the money. And why? Supposedly so these women may partake in a traditional, stay at home lifestyle

I can't wait until these retards die off and we get people who realize that giving women money for them to be thots only destroys tradition even more.

this is why people with a few bucks hide their fucking money. there are ways to hide money that these morons in the gubmint will never understand and or find out about

And what is a "woman's place"?

>Corinna: “... it’s not a case of being subject in the sense of obeying, but rather of suffering an imposition; not a case of serving them, but rather of tolerating them in a spirit of Christian charity, since they have been given to us by God as a spiritual trial. But they take the phrase in the contrary sense and set themselves up as tyrants over us, arrogantly usurping that domination over women that they claim is their right, but which is more properly ours. For don’t we see that men’s rightful task is to go out to work and wear themselves out trying to accumulate wealth, as though they were our factors or stewards, so that we can remain at home like the lady of the house directing their work and enjoying the profit of their labors? That, if you like, is the reason why men are naturally stronger and more robust than us — they need to be, so they can put up with the hard labor they must endure in our service.”

>Leonora replied: “A woman, when she is segregated from male contact, has something divine about her and can achieve miracles, as long as she retains her natural virginity. That certainly isn’t the case with men, because it is only when a man has taken a wife that he is considered a real man and that he reaches the peak of happiness, honor, and greatness. The Romans in their day did not confer any important responsibilities on any man who did not have a wife; they did not allow him to take up a public office or to perform any serious duties relating to the Republic. Homer used to say that men without wives were scarcely alive. And if you want further proof of women’s superior dignity and authority, just think about the fact that if a man is married to a wise, modest, and virtuous woman..."

>And why is saying so so triggering to feminists?
It's like naming the Jew. You call it out and they get mad.

Women are a meme and retarded. Don't believe me? Watch this 1 female vs 100 male and 1 male vs 100 female.
youtube.com/watch?v=85vFkiwwTEg&t=1536s

What the fuck am I even reading.

Exactly. If I ever end up with a wife, all my spare money is going into crypto and all my tangible assets will be in my brother's name. If I can't pay for insurance against divorce, I'll have to arrange things for myself.

A look into 16th century gynocentrism.

If you want the real answer, it is designed solely as a form of alternative welfare system. It is designed for the sole purpose of forcing men, who are smarter/more ambitious/etc give money to women that would otherwise come out of the state. It's just forced wealth transfer

You mean a look into some retarded women's viewpoints?

After hearing from my grandpa what it was like back then I can assure you it was about men punishing other men for being weak and letting their wife leave them.

When my grandpa got divorced in the 50's and his coworkers found out, they all treated him like shit and his boss made him to menial work despite scoring highest in the tests. He had to move to Ford where no one working there knew who he was in order to get decent work, and sure enough they put him in one of the top management positions making $2k a month during the 50's and 60's which was crazy money.

Unfortunately these laws haven't kept up with the high divorce rates, and they really shouldnt have been laws in the first place.

...

>asking this question
Why is it lately everything that isn't a shill/slide thread is old questions that have been asked 6 gorillian times?

It's a microcosm of the gyneolatric culture of her time. I'm sure you've heard of "female virtue" before? I have a collection from the same period as the female author whose work you've just spurned detailing such feminine virtue. It's like modern TV commercials, the white man is always the dumb one.

This shit has been going on for a long time. Part of it has to be the enjoyment of degradation, otherwise men would never subject themselves to putting up with this shit.

Men are worth more money (((they))) get a bigger cut if they divorce tax the man. Also women are avid consumers. If you divorce them from a mans fiscal restraint. All of that sweet Alimony money goes back into the consumer economy. Her sperm doner has provided his group function and sired a replacement or two. Now he lives only as a slave of the state to provide for a consumer and their future debt slaves. Who will be lovingly raised by the state education system. I wouldn't worry about it goyim.

Everything is triggering to feminists. Stupid question. Women bitch and nag others (government) to get what they want. Men get it themselves. Of course government favors women.

another from the same artist. It's always a woman stepping on a man. There's like 10 more that are just the same. Guy seriously had a fetish or something, "Petr Furnius."

...

24k a year is roughly 221k a year or 18k a month not bad

The power dynamics within any particular relationship aren't overly important so long as the roles and expectations are clearly defined.

You don't know how many newfags are on this board at any given time. We're constantly having to educate. These are not issues explored in the legacy media.

I agree Ahmed
But our society takes a dim view of emptying the contents of the nearest quarry onto some cunts head when we get bored of fucking them

a philosophy that built and could save the west. you life was meany to be toil, not ease. he life was meant to keel a home, not to toil.

The courts are still stuck in the 19th century concerning divorce

It's getting ridiculous. These cunts should LURK MOAR or search an archive.

So a cuck with a fetish for getting trampled on and a woman with a goddess complex are the standards for the entire 16th century?

No, not just the 16th century. Pretty much since 1200 A.D., the rise of courtly love and related poetry. It snowballed and got worse and worse, until the Victorian era where you got the cult of domesticity and the stereotypical image of the woman as the center of the family, so perfect and pretty and demure, etc. 19th century chivalry, more or less, where men are expected to bow and scrape before women.

The trampling fetish seems to actually be pretty common. I mean, it's on the state seal of Virginia. And you will never find a single depiction of a man representing virtue stepping on women representing evil. Perseus beheading Medusa is all that comes to mind and it's far from allegorical.

So in other words, the west has been sick for a long, long time and needs to finally be put out of its wretched misery.

Check out Turd flinging monkey on YouTube for a proper response to your inquiry

It's not just divorce courts, we are more lenient on women everywhere in every aspect of life. It would be far more strange if the divorce courts were the exception. There's like a 60%+ disparity in regular law for arrests of males over females, conviction, sentencing length, etc.

The entire gender bias comes down to women not having the physical strength of embodied coordination to provide and protect themselves throughout most of human development, men evolved to protect and women evolved to nurture and thus we became dependent on each other. Women evolved mechanisms to display distress when they needed help (crying, screaming, shaking, etc) and men evolved mechanism to be emotionally responsive to distress in women and come to their aid (white knight syndrome)

It's triggering to feminists because the data invalidates their world view, that men are in power (the patriarchy) and women are subjugated.

Half of the time I feel like I'm speaking exclusively to lurkers thanks to the omnipresence of
>1 post by this ID
OP posts. I suspect half the time these threads only get posted to keep everyone sharp anyway.

The way art depicts things may not be a proper reflection of reality, especially the art collections put together by modern radical egalitarians. As a reminder, courtly love and chivalry was more for the benefit of the woman's parents than the woman herself. She often had no say in the matter.

It's fucking insane how men are responsible to maintain women's economical status after the divorce since she got use to a some level of life style.

Spot on, you pommy cunt

The only reason to get married was social pressure around having children out of wedlock, and laws against adultery. That hasn't existed for decades now. You're not even allowed to get a DNA test of your 'own' children because that may violate a woman's privacy. And there's no longer any social negative to being a slut.

There's no reason to get married. It won't protect you from cheating, or make your relationship any more secure. You just risk half your wealth.

Feminists support a woman's right to 'trick' a man into having children by lying about birth control ect., but there's the male pill coming that will give guys control in that respect.

Just treat women the same way they treat men. Go for the best one you can, and use them until you find an upgrade.

Apps make it super easy to have a new women whenever you want one, and just lie about yourself as women do. You might be a poor loser who is unemployed and smokes weed all day, but buy some nice cloths and say you're a businessman. It's no different to the women that say they're 'aspiring' models/arts/dancers/etc.

It made sense 80 years ago when female employment was rare. Nowadays, the courts are just Jews exploiting outdated, archaic laws for profit. There's no justice here, just extortion at the expense of men.

We've been wounded. We've been wounded, but we've still conquered nearly every corner of the Earth and made countless scientific advancements and innovations along the way. We're doing alright now, we were doing alright then. That doesn't mean we shouldn't tend to our wounds.

A big wound right now that we're facing is a departure from traditional agricultural life to industrialism. That, combined with a fixation on romantic love over pragmatic love has destroyed the entire notion of the extended family. The nuclear family is Victorian space-age Jetsons garbage that should have never been allowed to gain as much credence as it has. For all the "trad" folks who want us to return to their steotypical idylls, they can go sodomize themselves with rakes. For one, returning to that trad lifestyle is unattainable. Women have already joined the work force, it's too late.

because women lack agency and it's society's job to take care of them

Partly this.

Partly this.

Most of it comes down to adequately and equitably taking care of the children. If you don't live in a retardedly litigious society like the US and A, it's not as bad as you think.

Can confirm. Lurk but rarely post.

>there are dozens of us
>dozens!

they can only hand over money that the courts and or government knows about the rest who the fuck knows where it is

There's reasons to get married, even today. Not financial ones, obviously, unless you're marrying a woman that makes six figures and wants you to be a stay at home dad. But there's more to life and more to relationships than how much money you make.

Ditch the PUA forums for awhile. Hedonism is bad for you.

>There's reasons to get married, even today.
What reasons? There's nothing that outweighs the financial risk.

Getting into a bad relationship/marriage can set a guy back a decade or more. With any similar kind of financial risk we get insurance. It makes complete sense for people to protect their financial interests in a relationship.

The best way to do that is not get married. 50% or more of all marriages in the US end in divorce, and the wealthier person gets screwed. Nobody would make that kind of gamble for any other reason.

Here living with someone for three months is a defacto relationship and they can take half your wealth. To avoid that only live as roommates who both pay rent. If someone isn't after your wealth, they should happily agree to those terms.

It's not hedonism, it's protecting oneself from financial predators.

Or simply don't date/marry someone with less.

This, always marry up or someone in the same league as you. Personally I would marry up

Turd flinging monkey is kind of an asshole sometimes but I am a subscriber & regular listener. He's no dummy

Because marriage is prostitution, and the State is the pimp. The pimp doesn't want his used-up whore hanging around the welfare line getting free shit from the pimp. The man has to pay the whore for her service (back rent of her pussy), in the form of private welfare.

I'd fling her turds with my tongue, if you know what I mean.

Well if you want or have kids then it gives you more control than as the baby daddy. It's not as hard to get custody as a dad than you guys think, either. These courts have seen plenty of shitty mothers. Don't fall into the trap of thinking they oppress you, like they have done.
Another reason is if anything happens to your partner medically you have more power than her family of origin. Otherwise they might be trying to pull the plug against your wishes or some shit like that. Another reason might be insurance benefits of various kinds. Also whose last name does your child take, etc. If you and the mother disagree on something , legally she can do more against your will if she is just your baby moms. These are some considerations

It's supposed to be that way.
Women are the ones who suffer most in divorces. Women are left with kids, without money. There has to be protection for women. Otherwise women would be exploited by men, taken advantage of, which is cruel.

Because of the emasculation of the White man. Women didn't make our society soft: White men did.

Depends what the mother is like. If they know what they're doing, you're never getting custody. And if they've got to a solicitor first, then they'll know what they're doing.

She accuse you of domestic violence and slap you with a temp order that will take you three to six months and $20,000 to fight in court--and she doesn't need any evidence.

You'll probably win the domestic violence case, as there's no evidence, but doesn't matter, you haven't been near your kids for 3-6 months, so when it goes to custody she's got status quo. You haven't been around for many months so why should the court consider you?

It's that easy.

>Women are the ones who suffer most in divorces
Children are the ones who suffer most in divorces. Those fathers who can't see their children and have to live enslaved to their whore mothers who probably see other men probably aren't very happy either.

Gynocentrism: case in point.

>Why are divorce courts heavily favored towards women?
>Why does the state allow blacks to get away with committing absurdly unproportionally high amount of crimes?
>Why do countries let poor syrian rapefugees from africa in?
It's a combined effort of many powerful group whose interests aligned with each other. But why? Well it's because all these actions and many more result in society that is easier to control and made out of people who are depandant on the state both physucally and emotionally and who seek cobsumption as a way to full the emptines of their meaningless existence.

Western (((democracies))) favour women simply becouse they are more susceptible to these tactics.

*who seek consumption as a way to fill the emptiness of their meaningless existence.

looks cuter without

How about males starting to behave, so that no divorce would be needed?
First you ruin a woman's life, and then you're whining when you have to pay a little bit of the price.
Pathetic.

you're completely retarded

canadians are all docile brainless animal slaves

You're gonna need some bigger bait, my friend.

So you're implying you have no responsibility for divorces. Explains much.

I like Donald even more now!

Who is this beauty?