Marriage

Florida Moves to Eliminate Lifelong Alimony

The bill has been panned as "anti-woman, anti-marriage, and anti-traditional family."

|

Stewf/Flickr

Florida lawmakers are considering an alimony reform bill that's proved quite controversial. The measure would eliminate lifelong alimony payments and use a formula based on the length of the marriage and spousal income differential to set alimony amount and duration.

Introduced by state Rep. Colleen Burton (R-Polk), Florida House Bill 943 "is stirring emotional arguments for and against," AP reports.

Alimony reform advocates have sought the change for years, saying recipients use permanent alimony to extort a lifetime meal ticket even when they could work. Opponents say that would make it impossible for mothers to leave careers to stay home with their children, for fear of being left destitute after a breakup.

Obviously forgoing paid work to raise children can leave women financially vulnerable. Perhaps those who fear financial ruin if they drop out of the workforce to raise kids shouldn't drop out of the workforce to raise kids. If they take that gamble, and the marriage ends in divorce, they may have to take a job that's less than optimal or otherwise live with the consequences of these choices. Like taking out too many student loans for a worthless degree or putting off having children until it's too late, it's a pitiable situation. But not one that should necessarily be corrected for with state force.

And let's be clear: Florida lawmakers are in no way trying to abolish alimony payments. Under the new formulation, alimony duration could be set at between 25 percent and 75 percent of the length of the marriage. "We want to be able to give judges discretion, but we don't want to give them so much discretion that there's no consistency from one sector to another, because right now there's no predictability or consistency," said Alan Frisher, co-founder of The Family Law Reform group. 

Perhaps with lifelong alimony off the table, we'd see a greater role for voluntary prenuptial agreements. Perhaps we'd see increased women's workforce participation. Perhaps we'd see public assistance rolls go up. Regardless of outcome, prohibiting a more objective, proportionate alimony formula seems hard to justify.  

H.B. 943 would also let people lower or end payments upon retirement, create a rebuttable presumption that no alimony be awarded for marriages of two years or less, prevent combined alimony and child support requirements from constituting more than 55 percent of the paying spouse's income, and establish that an increase in the payer's income "does not constitute a basis for a modification to increase alimony unless at the time the alimony award was established it was determined that the obligor was underemployed or unemployed." And it changes terms like "husband" and "wife" to the gender-neutral "spouse," presumably to accommodate Florida's now-legal same-sex marriages.

The bill has been panned as "anti-woman, anti-marriage, and anti-traditional family," but that's from members of the First Wives Advocacy Group, so take that for what you will. 

Florida Gov. Rick Scott vetoed alimony reform legislation in 2013, but that bill had language allowing for the reopening of old divorce cases, which the new legislation omits. A similar version of H.B. 943 has been introduced in the Florida Senate.

NEXT: Yes, Gov. Whitman, states may choose which federal laws to implement

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Florida still has alimony? Holy shit, I didn’t think it existed anywhere now.

    1. Colorado has moved to “Spousal Support,” which…is still just alimony.

    2. Dude, I pay my ex half of everything I make and that will be until she dies. . I also have to pay her lawyers. Death doesn’t get me out of that.

      1. That sucks, man. I would seriously consider just mysteriously disappearing if I were in that situation.

        1. If I could figure out a way, I would for sure.

          1. There’s some hilltop village in central america just waiting for el gringo to show up and take care of some fine young latina village lady.

            I’m surprised that the border crossings at our southern border is not mostly made of up american men going the other direction.

            1. Can he bring his new wife?

            2. Food and shelter then become the main issues.

            3. Turns out that it’s worse everywhere else for myriad reasons.

            4. There are indeed a lot of gringos in Mexico who take up with Mexican women. However, they’re either wealthy or retir’d. If you’re neither of those two, you’re likely not going to find much work in Mexico aside from teaching English and even then that is a lot of paperwork.

      2. It’s bullshit like this that young men need to consider carefully before they Propose.

        1. If I were a young man in this country I would not get married or have children if you paid me 10 million dollars to do it.

          1. Well that’s because Uncle Sam would walk away with five, and she’d leave with the other five, plus half your ongoing income.

          2. I paid for my wife’s law school. Guess who gets alimony if we divorce?

            1. It better be you, or that law is anti-modern family,

              1. Oh, it is.

            2. You can hide all your assets in my bank account.

              1. God bless you! I’m prince of Nigeria with 15 million dollars needing to be deposited in your account by postal draft before my 57 ex-wives find it. I have cut a deal with Boko Haram to beheaded their lawyers, but Boko is afraid of my wives. I will reward you with a finders fee of 8 MILLION DOLLARS if you can help me.

            3. That’s what you get for letting your wife read books. Especially law books.

      3. I’m lucky enough where I was able to get my ex-wife to accept an alimony free divorce since we were only married for 18 months (protip: never marry a woman who identifies with the Kardashians). And she’s getting re-married in a few months I think. I almost feel bad for that poor sumbish.

        1. (protip: never marry a woman who identifies with the Kardashians)

          Finally! A use for them. Now I wish it had been invented decades ago.

          Actually, I’m sure the elder men in my life gave me advice in this regard. I blame them for waiting until my ‘Yeah, whatever’ years.

        2. I’m always fascinated by marriages that end so soon. Mostly because there had to be a sign it would end that way while dating I think, no?

          1. Ironic timing for this conversation as this weekend marked two years since we split (which I only recalled because a coworker was asking me about my divorce on Friday). As for signs that it would end while we were dating, maybe. It’s frankly hard to tell. The frequency of sex did dip after about the one year dating mark (we ended up marrying after about 2.5 years of dating). But there were other factors involved that might have contributed. My then-gf contracted a brain tumor nine months into our relationship and was on anti-seizure meds thereafter, and those meds apparently do decrease libido, plus, I was of the belief that sex life generally dipped after the first year of the relationship anyhow.

            But I didn’t really have any doubts going into the marriage, and had I, I probably would’ve cut everything off before getting hitched. Ultimately, I think everything was going generally well up until six months after the wedding. Her father died, suddenly and early (only 55 at the time of his passing via heart attack) and she pretty much checked out emotionally and I didn’t know how to handle the emotions that came with that. I tried empathizing the whole time even while after a few months I was thinking to myself “get the fuck over it already.” It was a whirlwind of an experience and I’ve no regrets with how everything turned out. But a surreal experience no doubt.

            1. Interesting.

              My wife lost her father and it certainly changed her.

              I can relate.

              1. I’ve never lost anyone I was close to, aside from childhood pets. I had no concept of how to handle what followed, especially since she was definitely a pampered princess. I ended up spending a few months helping my brother in law (only 24 at the time), run his dad’s business (bro in law worked there, but only as online marketing and had no concept of balancing books). I think her family really respected and appreciated what I did in making sure that her mother would get as much money out of the business (pretty much all of her father’s estate wrapped up in that, plus maybe 400k in home equity) as possible. I spent most of that marriage dedicated to serving her family and manning up and I got shit on in the end for it.

                In a way, it’s sad that I ended up so cynical afterwards. But I have completely learned the wisdom of Robert Greene’s 10th Law of Power: avoid the unhappy and unlucky.

            2. So there are others…

              My ex divorced me because I “wasn’t sad enough” at her father’s funeral.

              Sorry to hear about it hombre, things WILL get better.

  2. Introduced by state Rep. Colleen Burton (R-Polk), Florida House Bill 943 “is stirring emotional arguments for and against,” AP reports.

    Republican War on Women.

    1. Equality means she gets half your shit for the rest of your life.

  3. WAR ON WOMYN!

    /obligatory

  4. Obviously forgoing paid work to raise children can leave women financially vulnerable.

    As someone who has had more than one marriage I can assure you that marrying women leaves men far more financially vulnerable than any woman could ever find herself marrying a man.

  5. prevent combined alimony and child support requirements from constituting more than 55 percent of the paying spouse’s income

    55%!!? I am almost certain that this figure would cause me to go postal. It is amazing that there are not more murders of ex-spouses and judges, especially when you consider the fact that, apparently, those two things, at the present, could add up to MORE than 55%!!

    1. Government taxes eat up the other 45%.

      1. Alimony is deductible.

        1. *** snorts ***

          And to think some claim the tax code is not fair.

        2. Child support is not.

    2. I’d be washing dishes for cash under the table for the rest of my life if it came down to that.

      1. It wouldn’t matter. They assign alimony and child support based on what they determine you SHOULD be earning, based on education, experience, past earnings, etc. whether you actually are or not. And if you can’t pay, off to jail you go.

        1. They’d have to find me first.

        2. It’s not “off to jail you go.”

          It’s “now there is a bench warrant for you’re arrest, and if a cop has an excuse to run your information then you’re fucked.”

            1. 2 out of 3 ain’t bad.

        3. Jail would be a tempting alternative.

  6. ” Perhaps with lifelong alimony off the table, we’d see a greater role for voluntary prenuptial agreements. Perhaps we’d see increased women’s workforce participation. Perhaps we’d see public assistance rolls go up.”

    Or perhaps people would be more cautious about getting married. Perhaps people would think twice about getting a divorce.

  7. establish that an increase in the payer’s income “does not constitute a basis for a modification to increase alimony unless at the time the alimony award was established it was determined that the obligor was underemployed or unemployed.”

    Why isn’t this the case by default? How does the ex-wife (or ex-husband) have any right to the husband’s property acquired after the divorce?

    1. It’s an “investment” methodology. Jane loved and supported Jack for five years thereby allowing Jack to build his career into what it is today, therefore Jane is entitled to the fruits of Jack’s career that exists as a partial result of her noble sacrifice.

      Must throw up now.

  8. Wait, I thought that women are equal now? So if the guy wants to quit his job, stay home and raise the kids, can he screw the woman out of half her income, forever? If not, this law is obviously sexists. Alimony, fuck it’s been a long time since I’ve even heard that evil word.

    Reasons to not live in FL.

    1. hurricanes
    2. bad cops
    3. you might get married

    1. Exactly my point.

    2. Bad cops and marriage are waaaaaaaaaay higher than hurricanes. You see Hurricanes coming 5 days ahead of time and can get away from them easily. Cops and your wife are always there. Maybe not always malicious, but they are always there…waiting to strike.

      1. Just TRY spotting your wife or a cop from orbit. I’ll wait.

        1. Just how big a woman is Hyp married to, anyway?

          1. 5’2″, 125 lbs.

  9. Perhaps with lifelong alimony off the table, we’d see a greater role for voluntary prenuptial agreements.

    Problem is that a judge can toss out a prenup under all sorts of pretexts. So that may not be helpful.

    1. Always file a pregnancy test signed by an MD with the prenup. ALWAYS. If a women signs a prenup while pregnant, it’s under duress, and it gets tossed out.

      1. In my ex’s case, it was 10 years before she got pregnant. It was “explained” to me that I didn’t have the right to make California pay her welfare so she couldn’t assign away her “rights”. So the judge tossed out the pre-nup.

        It was all about the state having to avoid paying her to sit on her lazy Peg Bundy ass and eat bon-bons and make me do it.

        1. Man, I feel for you.

        2. Fucking brutal.

  10. First Wives Advocacy Group

    I ain’t sayin’ she’s a goldigga…

    1. 18 years, 18 years..

      1. And on the 18th birthday he found out it wasn’t his!

  11. The business of marriage is really insidious.

    It is socially-designed to be a lifetime fulfillment source where emotional states climax on the wings of angels and the sunlit vista of majestic eternal commitment when in reality marriage is a total fucking gamble between hardscrabble romance or the visceral carpet-bombing of all that is held dear for all involved.

    Voluntary prenups would wonderfully remove the romantic stigma from lifelong commitment and put a much more sober and staid approach on the dysfunctional bullshit of marriage.

    As a partnering skeptic (in a 20-year relaxed marriage to an amazing chick I might add) I am horrified that any thinking person could possibly rationalize that lifelong alimony is appropriate under any circumstance aside from a consensual one.

    1. It is socially-designed to be a lifetime fulfillment source where emotional states climax on the wings of angels and the sunlit vista of majestic eternal commitment when in reality marriage is a total fucking gamble between hardscrabble romance or the visceral carpet-bombing of all that is held dear for all involved.

      And that, dear readers, is the problem right there. My wife and I are far from perfect beings, but we both entered into marriage with that silly old-fashioned notion that it’s a lifetime commitment, even on the days you don’t wholly feel like it, whose primary benefit is to your children, and by extension society when you (hopefully) raise well-adjusted, productive new citizens. Carrying out that mission with someone who a) also wants to do it b) with you is just the icing on the cake.

      The idea that marriage is a lifetime of daily perfect dates and multiples, interspersed with 18 hours of perfectly-written dialogue and laying in a field of daisies on top of a mountain … that’s what’s destroying marriage.

      1. Well said.

        Also, I blame Disney.

      2. Agreed. My wife and I were both tired of being married, being parents and seeing each other. So we shouted about the baby’s dinner, she cried, we drank some cheap wine, and then we made up. At no time was there any thought that “maybe we aren’t right for each other”.

        I should mention that she’s pregnant, so it isn’t unexpected to have her crying and shout “but he doesn’t even have any vegetables” about the son’s dinner when we are all tired and he is happily scarfing chicken nuggets.

        I think we’re both disappointed that we’re having another boy. Not, like lock the new one in a closet and neglect it disappointed. we just both want a daughter.

        1. (3 boys here)

          1. (I used to not drink except for special occasions)

            1. (I used to not drink except for special occasions)

              Having met you in person, I find this proposition dubious at best, good sir.

          2. You are the only person I know with a son named Fuckface.

            1. I think you’re referring to fuckface 3.

              1. So this is like a George Foreman deal?

        2. The level of transparency in this entire thread is violating people’s freedom from speech all over the place.

        3. I’ve got 1 of each. Little girls are um, dramatic.

          1. I have to educate my 8 year-old daughter how not to seriously injure me while wrestling. Kid always wants to fucking wrestle. And, I’m a big, strong, manly-man… I just don’t appreciate having my eyes gouged and my organs stomped on. So, a fight stoppage is usually in order and a reiteration of the rules which include no flying side-kicks, no spinning back fists, and no jumping off the couch onto my spine. Her ability to retain not killing her Dad is limited it seems.

            1. My daughter is 6. She never hurts me while wrestling, but will damn near kill me trying to crawl on me(she’s got real bony knees and elbows that naturally land on the softest organ). Her problem is just that she got a few personality traits from me and my wife that don’t work well together.

              1. Ha. You guys are killing me.

                My daughter is 9 and she always managed to find the vulnerable spots whenever he horse around.

            2. Anecdote: my colleague took his young daughter sledding and she flew off the sled and tore his bicep right off its tendons. He’s now in PT for the next few months.

              1. So there you have it: Daughters can be as dangerous as sons.

            3. So, a fight stoppage is usually in order and a reiteration of the rules which include no flying side-kicks, no spinning back fists, and no jumping off the couch onto my spine.

              Sounds like Ronda Rousey’s next challenger.

        4. If it makes you feel better, not all boys are stereotypically boy. Mine is, but I have a friend whose boy cries at sad scenes in movies, and thought he was going to have to go live with the neighbors because he liked a different football team. And a neighbor whose girl is louder, meaner and throws more tantrums than any boy her age.

          (Then I have another neighbor whose boy literally dresses and acts like a girl, but I digress)

          1. “Then I have another neighbor whose boy literally dresses and acts like a girl, but I digress”

            Do they claim ‘It’s just a phase?’

            1. Gratifyingly, no. They buy him dresses and dolls, and avoid spending time around anyone who has demonstrated dickishness about it. Well, as much as they can given public schools.

          2. thought he was going to have to go live with the neighbors because he liked a different football team.

            Haha that was me growing up. Born in Texas and spent most of my formative years in Minnesota, and somehow managed to become a Saints fan when I was a boy.

        5. I have a daughter, 7 going on 15. High maintenance from the day she was born. You’re welcome to borrow her anytime. Then you may decide whether or not you were right to be disappointed your second child is a boy.

          (Also, 2 and a half yr old girl and 9 month old boy. They’re still good.)

        6. I hope she wasn’t drinking cheap wine during the pregnancy

  12. Do they allow same sex marriages in FL? If so, how do they determine who to fuck over when there’s a divorce?

    1. The partner with the most to lose, more than likely.

      1. I guess we’ll finally start to see some women turning against this theft then.

  13. “If they take that gamble, and the marriage ends in divorce”

    Wouldn’t it make a difference whose fault the divorce is – whether a person who initiates divorce because they’re tired of the marriage, or on the other hand someone who engages in adultery, spouse abuse, etc, providing a legitimate reason for divorce?*

    I would say that the person who is at fault in the divorce – yes, I used the f word – should not be able to tap into the wronged spouse’s income.

    *Yes, divorce, remarriage is another issue.

    1. In a no-fault divorce, the initiating party should have no claim on the assets of the other party, and the presumption of custody, etc should lie with the non-initiating party, unless substantive grounds can be presented by the initiating party for the removal thereof (thereby removing the ‘no-fault’ condition of the divorce)

      1. If the innocent spouse is innocent, that means (s)he is perfectly competent to raise the kids. If the guilty spouse thinks (s)he is a better parent, (s)he should prove it by not cheating on, or beating, the kids’ other parent.

        1. To be clear, I’m not discussing the way the law *is,* but the way it *ought to be.*

        2. (1) Define “guilty”
          (2) Elucidate a vision for “fault” that doesn’t work the same way divorce did before legalized no fault divorce. What if you can’t afford to prove cause because the other abusive spouse has all of the assets?

          1. (1) Here’s an example of fault – based grounds from Tennessee law (they also have no-fault):

            Impotence
            adultery
            conviction of a felony and imprisonment
            alcoholism or drug addiction
            wife is pregnant by another at the time of marriage without husband’s knowledge
            willful desertion for 1 year
            bigamy
            endangering the life of the spouse
            conviction of an infamous crime
            refusing to move to Tennessee with a spouse and willfully absenting oneself from a new residence for 2 years
            cruel and inhuman treatment or unsafe and improper marital conduct
            indignities that make the spouse’s life intolerable
            abandonment, neglect, or banning the spouse from the home

            (2) Going back to the old definition would be OK, not by any means perfect, but better than what we have now. I suppose some tweaking might be in order.

              1. “What if you can’t afford to prove cause because the other abusive spouse has all of the assets?”

                That’s an obstacle to *any* kind of litigation. What about a no-fault case where the other spouse has all the assets?

                1. And the problems with the old system tended to involve collusive suits, IIRC, which are difficult to avoid in an adversary system.

                  1. Perhaps mutual consent, proclaimed by both spouses in open court in three successive court sessions, could be added as grounds for divorce.

            1. Impotence?

              that’s cold

  14. Yeah, marraige laws are vastly outdated. I don’t think the State needs to be involved at all. If people want protections like alimony they can get a prenup. Child support system is in place regardless of married status so thats the most important thing. That should include allowances for day care so mom can work and I’m sure that it does.

    1. That should include allowances for day care so mom can work and I’m sure that it does.

      Child support is far in excess of what it should be already. It’s mostly spent by the money grubbing ex wives on themselves.

      1. To make themselves *better mothers*, sirrah!

    2. And in shared custody situations, there should be no child support at all.

    3. I used to think child support was fair. Then I had a kid and had to pay it. No, my kid’s mom has disappeared, and how hard do you think the state is searching for her to ensure I get the child support she owes me?

      1. *”Now, my kid’s mom…”

        We need to lobby harder for that edit button….

    1. I hate that geography-raping industry with a passion. But I digress…

    2. The son is 30 years old. So at this point, the relationship between the father and son is none of the ex wife’s business.

      1. I wasn’t really speaking to the father/son relationship, but the fact that she filed for support 20 years AFTER they divorced. Seems crazy to me.

        1. Yes, I know. I just noticed that and wanted to make a comment about it.

          Not sure what this guys fate will be if he’s in the UK as I don’t know what their divorce laws are like, but I don’t think she could collect on this here in the states.

          1. She could in California, at least.

            1. Hey, what kind of candy do you have?

              1. I specialize in walnetto.

                1. Time split into a font and rearranged itself as moniker it appears. How thrifty of it.

              2. Depends on how old you are. He has puppies too.

              3. A tootsie roll and a couple jellie beans?

  15. Why is it anti-woman? Can men not get alimony?
    Surely the pre-existing laws are neutral with respect to gender, so this should be just as likely to allow career oriented women to avoid paying alimony to ex-husbands as vice-versa.

    If there is any gender disparity, it is solely because women choose to be second earners and choose to be the stay at home parent. But if trends in higher education continue that situation could soon be reversed.

    1. I frequent a couple of university campuses that I have clients at. I was at one of them this past Friday and I noted that about 80 – 90% of the students are female. That’s no exaggeration.

    2. You really think family courts treat men and women equally?

      1. I know for a fact they do not.

      2. You really think family courts treat men and women equally?

        HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

        Wait, gotta catch my breath.

        HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

          1. Oh, and don’t call me Shirley.

    3. The magical words “disparate impact,” Hazel. Equality doesn’t mean you are held accountable for your decisions. Duh.

    4. Surely the pre-existing laws are neutral with respect to gender

      Yeah, right.

    5. It’s happening already on the financial timeline of some relationships- including mine.

      I started a business while very young and became reasonably successful. Bought some property and built a home while my partner made very little money over the space of 20 years toward the end of which it was time to fuck some new humans into existence.

      At this point in time she decided to get all ‘careery’ and a role-switch was in order which resulted in her becoming incredibly successful working as an executive with a Fortune 100 company while I run a very small office, take care of the kids, get drunk a lot, and build all sorts of shit.

      She’s conceivably worth far more than me at this point in time and I tell her that the only reason I haven’t murdered her for the large life insurance policy is only because she has a really cute butt.

      1. And use hallucinogens. Don’t sell yourself short, your stardust prophet.

    6. They can but it is exceedingly rare for it to happen, even in cases where if the genders were reversed it would be a no brainer.

    7. Women as a group are likely to lose claim to more money than men under this proposal. That’s it. The women’s advocacy groups don’t care if it may be more sensible or just on an individual basis. It is all group effects.

  16. The bill has been panned as “anti-woman, anti-marriage, and anti-traditional family,” but that’s from members of the First Wives Advocacy Group, so take that for what you will.

    All divorced women are rape victims, ok?

    1. Wait… I thought that ALL women are rape victims.

      1. Just the one’s who’ve had “penis in vagina”.

        1. What if someone just looks at their boobs or ass in a lustful manner and it triggers them. Isn’t that rape too? You know, it’s like mental rape, so it’s still rape.

          1. You’re right. I hope you’ll forgive my insensitivity. All that white male privilege keeps going to my head.

    2. A real jewel here:

      …PIV is a man mounting on a woman to thrust a large member of himself into her most intimate parts, often forcing her to be entirely naked, banging himself against her with the whole weight of his body and hips, shaking her like he would stuff a corpse, then using her insides as a receptacle for his penile dejection. How is this a normal civilised, respectful way to treat anyone? Sorry for the explicit picture, but this is what it is and it’s absolutely revolting and violating.

      I think ‘radical wind’ here missed her calling as a garden gnome.

        1. I think ‘romance’ isn’t the correct term here… maybe fuck-bending novelist or something?

          1. maybe fuck-bending novelist or something?

            Given the lack of imagination when it comes to sex, IMO, it sounds like she could lead a Baptist Megachurch to me.

            1. Wasn’t “Penile Dejection” a Morrissey song? Or was it Bronski Beat?

        2. Is this one of Sugarfree’s nom de plumes?

          1. Wary Hugeman and the Corpse-stuffer of Doom?

          2. No, Sug wouldn’t have bemoaned the degradation; he’d have celebrated it.

      1. I dunno what the hell … but women seem to like that very thing she is describing as some type of abuse. She can ramble on like that all she wants, but I don’t think she’s going to get too many women to agree with that.

      2. I dunno what the hell … but women seem to like that very thing she is describing as some type of abuse. She can ramble on like that all she wants, but I don’t think she’s going to get too many women to agree with that.

        1. Fucking squirrels, I hate squirrels.

        2. I occasionally encounter one of those. Not sure if it’s sincere or just trolling. Sad either way.

      3. whether she thinks she wants it or not

      4. She and SugarFree should write a book together

        1. I was thinking the same thing.

      5. Huh – and I thought this was just “how babies are made”.

        How does she propose men impregnate wymyn to continue the species?

        Scratch that – I propose men stop impregating wymyn, since homo sapiens clearly needs to die out, based upon derp like this…

      6. shaking her like he would stuff a corpse

        WTF?

        1. Struck me similarly… how does one go about obtaining this level of detail on ‘corpse-stuffing’?

        2. She’s a rad fem lesbian. I don’t she knows anything about heterosexual intercourse outside of a few pornos she hate-watched.

        3. Did she maybe confuse corpses for scarecrows?

          1. Screwing a scarecrow has a less macabre ring to it, pan fried w. This morbid cunt is all about the craven fuck.

      7. If a woman mounts a man and thrusts his most intimate parts into herself, banging herself against him with the whole weight of her body and hips, shaking him like she would ride a corpse, then stealing his vital fluid it is? …….Nice.

      8. PIV is a man mounting on a woman to thrust a large member of himself into her most intimate parts, often forcing her to be entirely naked, banging himself against her with the whole weight of his body and hips, shaking her like he would stuff a corpse, then using her insides as a receptacle for his penile dejection. How is this a normal civilised, respectful way to treat anyone? Sorry for the explicit picture, but this is what it is and it’s absolutely revolting and violating.

        I’ll be in my bunk…

        1. (in other words, Hyperion is correct)

          1. You should not enjoy things that disturb her.

            Obviously, you are a poor deluded minion of the Patriarchy. No matter, you shall be assimulated.

  17. Delayed divorce battle: Ecotricity founder Dale Vince’s New Age traveller ex-wife wins cash fight
    During the subsequent years they met up at Stonehenge, Glastonbury and elsewhere but eventually divorced in 1992. He was not required to pay maintenance because it was agreed he had no money.

    But his experience of rigging up an old pylon into a wind-powered telephone at the Glastonbury Festival shortly afterwards paved the way for founding, in 1996 of his wind energy firm. It is now worth an estimated ?57 million….

    1. The court heard how the pair lived together as a couple for just over two years. They met in 1981 when Mr Vince was 19 while Ms Wyatt, who was two years older, already had a daughter, Emily, who is now 36.

      They married that December and had a baby boy, Dane, in May 1983. But Mr Vince moved out the following year ? although Ms Wyatt insists they did not finally separate until some years later.

      1. It was not until 2011 that Ms Wyatt lodged a claim for financial support, arguing that he had failed to provide for their son, and her daughter, whom he had effectively accepted into the family

    2. And that, Dale, is why you never stick it in crazy. And “New Age Traveller” is definitely teh crazy.

  18. Judge ‘Outraged’ At Man Ordered To Pay $30,000 For A Kid That’s Not His
    …But Alexander says he was only first made aware of the false paternity claim during a 1991 traffic stop when the arresting officer told Alexander he was a “deadbeat dad.”

    That came as a shock to Alexander, who knew he was not the father of anyone’s child.

    Alexander’s case was bungled even further when a court document process server falsified a document showing that he refused to sign a court summons pertaining to the child support case. But Alexander was in jail at the time the document was served…..

    1. The courts make too much money off this racket, they don’t give a fuck about justice.

    2. But really, there’s no anti-male bias in the family court system, none at all.

      1. Men’s rights is totally just a silly little thing that PUA’s and asshole misogynist talk about.

        /s

    3. Having had a short stint after undergrad working for a PI (and doing service of process to make extra cash) I can completely see a process server lying their ass off. Between outdated contact information, clerical mistakes and the targets wanting to duck you, actually completing personal service is difficult. I was fairly lucky in finding folks (and not getting murdered) but I can remember my boss bitching one day about one guy I couldn’t track down. I told him it wasn’t going to be my signature on the affidavit if he was suggesting any chicanery.

      1. That’s why a process server should always film his work. That and to prevent police and prosecutors from conspiring to frame him for assault

  19. I still have trouble understanding why anyone would file with the State Conjugal Registry in the first place.

    1. Well, fuck me

    2. Tax Bennies.

  20. Women are simply fortunate that Florida is shaped like a flaccid penis instead of the other kind. It could be a triggering land mass deserving of nuclear reshaping.

    1. I think we should compile a real fact based sampling of the worst states to live in. Florida has many things that could get them a top spot, although they are still probably behind NJ and NY even with the better weather. I think PA is bidding for a top spot also.

      1. 90 feet from the sun is a big disqualifier.

      2. real fact based sampling of the worst states to live in

        Except everybody has different preferences so the exercise is completely pointless.

        1. I think it’s rather fact-based to say that North Korea is a terrible place to live.

          1. Not if your name is Kim.

            1. That doesn’t detract from the fact.

            2. I am pretty certsin there are plenty of people named Kim who have it shitty in NK, the notable exception notwithstanding.

      3. PA’s plan to keep people in the commonwealth is to be marginally better than the states that surround us. Rhywun is correct though, what makes a state a good place to live is largely personal. I’m not the biggest fan of Pennsylvania, but there is a pretty short list of states I would move to.

        1. Rhywun is correct though, what makes a state a good place to live is largely personal.

          For moral relativists. What makes sex good is largely personal, you therefore can’t objectively say that rape is any worse than consensual sex.

    2. What? Land mass trigger! You can’t just be satisfied with the fucking dozen or so trigger terms laying all over the damn rags already so you have to create yet another one that truly defies the odds? Your contribution is duly noted, scoffed at in a friendly but knowing way, and heralded as being unnecessarily, but cleverly, imaginative.

      1. But where are America’s balls?

        1. Probably somewhere under 3rd wave Feminism’s burka.

    3. Pssst. Turn the map upside down.

      1. You’ll offend the colleges, brah.

    4. If you put the map with East at the top (in the medieval style) you would see something different.

    5. Florida is shaped like a flaccid penis

      I always wondered, if Michiganders show people where they are from by pointing to a spot on their upturned right hand, how do (male, at least) Floridians show people what part of their great state they hail from?

  21. The UK is headed in the other direction.

    Kathleen Wyatt wins right to take her former husband, wind farm entrepreneur Dale Vince, to court despite not lodging a claim until nearly 20 years after their divorce

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new…..ayout.html

    1. The UK is heading in the other direction (the bad one) in many other ways than just that.

    2. This beast is growing long, spidery legs within the hollow recesses of this thread, kind sir.

  22. Between retroactive alimony and palimony with a generous definition of being together as a couple, men are hosed

  23. “it’s a pitiable situation. But not one that should necessarily be corrected for with state force”

    ENB, the self loathing is SO evident. Why do you hate womyn, including your self? I think you need to seek treatment.

    srsly

    1. Rational females are intoxicating.

  24. The bill has been panned as “anti-woman, anti-marriage, and anti-traditional family,” but that’s from members of the First Wives Advocacy Group, so take that for what you will.

    I’m almost breathless in disbelief with this one.

    Anti-woman? It strikes me as more anti-woman that someone would believe women so incapable of earning parity or even outearning men that the alimony thing wouldn’t benefit women in many circumstances.

    Anti-Marriage and Anti-Family? The great disparity in alimony payments is one reason that men in my generation are increasingly foregoing marriage and children. They know the deck is stacked against them, and that modern Eat, Pray, Love culture encourages women to walk out of once-sacred vows the moment they find it difficult or cease to be haapppppppyyyy. If anything, sensible reform of this nature is what is required to make marriage viable for men of quality.

    1. A traditional family is one where the mom and dad live in separate houses and the dad pays the mom for doing nothing.

      I don’t see why that’s so hard to understand.

      1. Or a lesbian coven.

      2. Or dad is in prison while the state pays the mom for doing nothing.

        1. That’s the black version.

      3. +1 Season of Ozzie & Harriet

  25. Florida Moves to Eliminate Lifelong Alimony

    Replaces with purple umbrella and 50 cent hat

    1. Cruising round town in a paisley caddillac?

  26. The bill has been panned as “anti-woman, anti-marriage, and anti-traditional family.”

    It will also mean the death of thousands of cute puppies by drowning inside burlap sacks…

    Doesn’t reforming anything mean the death of thousands of cute little puppies by drowning inside burlap sacks? Going by the hyperbole used by the little red Marxians, at least…

    The measure would eliminate lifelong alimony payments and use a formula based on the length of the marriage and spousal income differential to set alimony amount and duration.

    Divided by the square root of PI and multiplied by e.

  27. I work with a woman who pays a LOT of alimony

    I have no idea if she pissed off the judge or what

    Her ex is fully abled, no kids, etc

    No prenup

    At least in her case, she is screwn just like a guy, although in general family court is totally a fuck over the guy racket

    It’s all tied in with VAWA and a substantial percent of ‘domestic violence’ complaints are one half trying to establish a good trail of documentation to aid them in future family court proceedings

    In a potential breakup, a HUGE benefit goes to which party gets to the courthouse FIRST to file for a protective order

    Ive said it before – imo the war on domestic violence is far more dismissive of civil rights and with less due process than the war on drugs, especially for the innocent

    And yes, we had a knee jerk cop firing case wherethe guy got the year of back pay (including ot) after termination w/o due process on a bogus DV

    But if a partner is smart, they can proper fuck over a partner/spouse with little due process protection especially in cases where a job requires firearm carry (bail recovery, cop etc)

    Aspects of VAWA are also applied retroactively no expose facto protection because courts ruled them admin not ‘punitive’

    The system is predicated upon being proactive, assuming protection is needed w/o much due process, and erring on the side of ‘make the arrest’ in s criminal case

    1. Ugh voice to text ‘ex post FACTO protection’

      In WA state, the only mandatory arrest crimes involve DV

      in WA state, the only arrest where a cop enjoys ‘good faith’ immunity from lawsuit for arrest issues are DV arrests

      MAKE an arrest and full good faith immunity attaches and it’s the only offense where officers are statutorily encouraged to make an arrest where the facts are ‘unclear’

      Don’t make an arrest an far less civil protections attach

      VAWA etc bias the process as well as state law and precedent towards ARREST

      substantially so

      Mutual combat arrest is strongly discouraged. Very specific facts need to be present and I’ve made two in twenty plus years

      Almost always, IF a mandatory, one must divine who was the primary aggressor

    2. “Screwn”? Okaay…

  28. My husband has paid his able-bodied ex-wife 48% of his income for the last eleven years. The marriage lasted 17 years. He was ordered to pay her lifetime alimony even though she worked during the marriage. And, this is on top of splitting the marital assets in half. He works 60 hours a week and she works zero. He will not be able to retire unless we get alimony reform.

    I refused alimony when I divorced my first husband. I lived a couple of lean years as a result, but I worked my way back into my career choice. I have no regrets because this was the right thing to do. If you want to be considered an equal, you must act like one.

    We need to fix our broken Family Law statutes. The rulings I have seen are outrageously one-sided towards the “helpless, little woman or man” The payer pays all until he is forced into bankruptcy. And, the other gets an entitlement regardless of their ability to work…for a lifetime.

    Both parties should be considered “adults fully capable of taking care of themselves” unless there is evidence otherwise. Durational alimony? Yes, give them a deadline to take action to support themselves. That is reasonable. If not, they will not take action. It’s time for Florida to correct the alimony system just like Texas did. Our taxpayers, who happened to chose the wrong partner deserve to retire.

    1. I say treat marriage exactly like you would any other contract (and my support for gay marriage is entirely premised on Lochner right to contract as opposed to any equal protection claims, since hetero and homosexuals are both forbid from marrying the same sex in the states where gay marriage is not allowed).

      As a standard contract, if someone decides to divorce, then that party foregoes any alimony claim because that party is in breach of the contract. Likewise if adultery can be proven, since that it is also a breach of the marriage contract.

    2. The payer pays all until he is forced into bankruptcy.

      Nope. Bankruptcy doesn’t get you out of alimony obligations.

      1. Yeah I never heard of that. Your obligations remain, whether you’re broke or not. The only thing that gets you out of your obligations is death.

        1. That doesn’t even work. Judge awarded her my life insurance and social security death benefits.

          1. Judge awarded her my life insurance and social security death benefits.

            How does that work? Wouldn’t federal law trump anything a judge rules on how SS funds would be distributed?

            1. Nope.

  29. I urge everyone to support alimony reform of our state’s outdated, unjust, and ultimately unfair alimony laws. I am a St. Pete Beach, FL resident caught up in the injustice of the current alimony laws. I was betrayed by my wife after 20 years of marriage when she came out of the closet, declared herself a lesbian, acknowledged she’d always been one, was having an adulterous affair with her twenty year old cousin, and became active in the gay community. Divorce followed in Hillsborough County (Tampa) and the no-fault State of Florida sentenced me to a lifetime of alimony payments. There was no opportunity to present the reason for the divorce in court and the judge rewarded my ex-wife with permanent spousal support. She was in her 40s, a summa cum laude college graduate and quite capable of providing for herself had she the incentive to do so. Awarding her lifetime alimony removed any such incentive. Instead, she chose to abandon her career, opting to live off the $4,000 monthly alimony. I, conversely, must work to support the ex-spouse, leaving only minimal funds to pursue my own life and provide for my new wife and family. I am by no means wealthy, have my own health issues, and find myself forced into a lifetime of indentured servitude.

    1. . The entitlement minded members of the group opposed to alimony reform continue to spread misinformation about both the vetoed bill of 2013 as well as the two current bills HB 943 SB 1248 that have been filed recently. This can only be viewed as a selfish attempt to preserve their own alimony derived income. They assert the bill would be devastating to families and this is absurd. The families in question were already devastated when the divorce occurred. It is the current laws that further devastate the parties afterwards by bleeding one while encouraging dependency in the other. The new bill does not alter child support responsibilities so children’s welfare remains protected and provided for.

      The claims the bill is anti-women and this is also completely untrue. Indeed, there are women paying lifetime alimony too, in some cases to men who abused them! Florida’s antiquated alimony laws date from an era when women were less educated and not expected to support themselves. Times have changed and single and divorced women are educated, trained, gainfully employed and financially independent.

      1. They claim the existing law already provides for termination of alimony when the obligor reaches retirement age. Like their other allegations, this is patently false and obviously self-serving. While the current law may provide the right to hire a lawyer and seek modification of alimony at retirement age, it does not end alimony payments nor does it assure a reduction in the amount being paid. Many alimony payers cannot afford or even think of retiring and will have to work until the day they die!

        The abolition of permanent alimony and the establishment of specific guidelines on how long alimony should be paid is necessary.

        Divorce shouldn’t carry a lifetime penalty to one party for the benefit of the other. When a couple divorces, separation of lives should follow. The State of Florida is in effect penalizing me for a failed marriage caused by the deception and sexual identity issues of my former spouse. I am tethered for life to my gay ex-wife. Alimony Reform is needed to remedy this situation.

        – Alimony should provide for a transition to a new life and not permanently fund that new life

        – Alimony should be awarded based on need with established guidelines.

        – Maintaining the marital standard of living is obsolete and impossible.

        – Alimony and its length should be determined via a formula and not the whim of a judge

        Alimony reform is fair. It’s what the people want and it’s the right thing for the State of Florida and its families.

  30. My alimony horror story: https://youtu.be/l523XAgv_vc

  31. Why would a bill eliminating life-long alimony be “anti-woman”? Hmmm? HMMMMMMM? Anyone care to answer that?

  32. By the way, I predicted long ago that when gay marriage became more recognized, we’d start to see major reforms in divorce law. Is this the beginning of that, or is this just coincidence?

  33. “Alimony is a system by which, when two people make a mistake, one of them
    continues to pay for it.” — Peggy Joyce

  34. When the ex-spouse receiving alimony, child support or both re-marries, that should cut off the payments. The responsibility of support should go to the new spouse.

    Child support should cut off at age 18, no exceptions, no extensions.

  35. Just in time when women start paying alimony.

  36. True freedom for men will come with:

    1. A presumption of equal custody (rotating custody every two years or so ? and no, that’s not bad for kids)
    2. RESTORING the unwed father’s right to decline to be the legal father of a child born out of wedlock.

  37. Try being in the military. Half your retirement pay can go to any ex you were married to. Even if she’s screwing around. Because she supposedly supported your career, so she gets half your retirement. And that’s the law. If your wife also worked, say, in the GS system, ended up with better pay, never went to war, never slept on the cold hard ground, never humped 100+ lbs of PPE, never go shot at…she still gets half. Oh, and her retirement pay, nearly 2/3 more than your retirement pay, you don’t get any of that. So you get half, and your ex gets over double what you get to keep with her retirement pay plus half of yours.
    I know because I’m living it.

  38. We’ve been through this before. Even when both sides agreed to eliminate lifetime alimony, the governor still vetoed the bill. The women’s lobby does not want to give up money, it’s that simple.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.