If they divorce with children the father of the bride should pay child support

[DorkShitParticipant 4353]

I believe if the goal is to protect the children of a divorce then a simple legal adjustment would suffice.

Problem: Woman chooses to divorce her husband, with children, and claims irreconcilable differences.

Solution: Her father is given joint custodial charge of children, with her husband, and is responsible for their care and financial support.

Problem solved. The end.

The law could be named the father of the bride red pill divorce law.

Peace brothers

[Anonymous 54]

It would motivate her Dad to teach her to work at her marrage and be a good wife.

[DorkShitParticipant 4353]

Yep. I see only positives.

When she walks down the aisle her father gives her away to her husband. If she walks away from marriage her husband gives her away to her father.

I bet our society of feminists would fizzle. Or at least we wouldn’t be alone. We’d have good old father in law with us in our misery.

Peace brothers

[Faust For ScienceParticipant 22522]

Anonymous wrote:

It would motivate her Dad to teach her to work at her marrage and be a good wife.

Or, increase the rate of “honor killings”.

Given the divorce, gynocentric, anti-male culture and courts, daddy usually has no say in how the daughter is raised (if she is his daughter). But, he still had to pay child support or go to jail. Now, you want to force the man to also pay for the bitch daughter’s bastard children.

[Anonymous 54]

Faust For Science wrote:

Old Sage wrote:

It would motivate her Dad to teach her to work at her marrage and be a good wife.

Or, increase the rate of “honor killings”.

Given the divorce, gynocentric, anti-male culture and courts, daddy usually has no say in how the daughter is raised (if she is his daughter). But, he still had to pay child support or go to jail. Now, you want to force the man to also pay for the bitch daughter’s bastard children.

A rehtorical question.A less than litteral responce.

[CombatRollParticipant 2594]

The happiest sonofabitch at my wedding was my FIL.

I was puzzled. I thought he would be a little sad, bittersweet.. losing his daughter. Well, she was 29 (I was 3 years younger).

She’d never bought a car, paid her insurance and he even stocked her fridge until I married her.

Finally years later I had an epiphany. F~~~er! He was getting this RED INK off his ledger and on to mine.

Yes – this is a great law. F~~~.

[Anonymous 54]

Imagine your at Thanksgiveing dinner at her parents. Your marrage is on the rocks.Hes just glareing at you! Haja

Litteral responce.

No I dont think the Father of the Bride should be required to pay child support.

[Anonymous 0]

DorkShit wrote:

I believe if the goal is to protect the children of a divorce then a simple legal adjustment would suffice.

Problem: Woman chooses to divorce her husband, with children, and claims irreconcilable differences.

Solution: Her father is given joint custodial charge of children, with her husband, and is responsible for their care and financial support.

Problem solved. The end.

The law could be named the father of the bride red pill divorce law.

LOL +1

Anonymous wrote:

It would motivate her Dad to teach her to work at her marrage and be a good wife.

If he even knows how.

[bladeParticipant]

Would be a hard call because there are not many grand fathers in there grand childrens lives and my father is a perfect example of that . Alot of kids are not in there fathers lives to add to that to .

THE PLANTATION HAS NOW TURNED INTO THE KILLING FIELDS . WOMAN ARE NOW ROLLING CAMBODIAN STYLE .

[experiencedParticipant]

It may open the door to a guy paying child support for 18 years for a child he basically never gets to raise, and then, here comes a new bill as Dowter has f~~~ed up her marriage as mom had.
Looks like another eighteen years.

No easy answers, but if a woman has the authority to end the marriage/family unit, then she should have the responsibility of proving who was at fault. She’s f~~~ed
Chad whilst married, she gets nothing…………….. nothing.

Of course it’ll be a huge tide to turn things around to this.

"It seems like there's times a body gets struck down so low, there ain't a power on earth that can ever bring him up again. Seems like something inside dies so he don't even want to get up again. But he does."

[VanXingParticipant 98]

This law makes no sense. You are again putting more burden on a man be it an older man. Why don’t you put that mother of the woman with the child should be paying child support?

[GnosticParticipant 2491]

I don’t believe giving the government more power is the answer. It gives them more victim to f~~~ over.

It will certainly go down the path of “That is the best for the child, both the father and grandfather paying child support will give more resource to the child.”

You must support it, are you a child hater?

Remove government from marriage and a lot of problem will solve themselves. Women having to be responsible will only have a child when the family is ready and she actually loves the child, not weaponize the child for financial benefits.

There is no magic in MGTOW, just recognition of the truth and logical decision how to avoid dangers. The red pill is but the truth, it is no magical potion. Do not think in this modern world men have no longer have natural enemies, men are prey to women and government.

[Sky-OParticipant 18936]

Interesting parallel to a situation like that.

Isn’t it amazing how a father wants his daughter to get married to a guy with money while never stating the true reason why.

He might imply that it is so she is ‘taken care of’, etc.

But the reality of it is that a woman’s father ultimately wants to transfer the financial liability he has for her over to a guy (husband) that will start paying her bills and assume all of the costs associated with the children she has.

It’s the greatest scheme in the history of mankind.

And what better idiot to sign up for it than the husband. Who initially (and illogically) gets onboard with the financial suicide pact primarily due to the pussy he is getting at the time.

And regarding the grandchildren. Grandparents love having grandkids. They just don’t want to be legally responsible for paying for them.

[Silverstone the SecondParticipant]

You’d see a lot more scrutiny from her own family. There wouldn’t be a whole family sitting there calling the man an asshole if they had to pay for their daughter’s mistake. She’s the one that brought it on them all, and so they would put her under pressure to make s~~~ work and be a good human being. Yep, the dynamic would change a whole bunch. Women would no longer divorce if they knew their family had to pay for things and that divorce wasn’t a free and automatic money machine for her.

Feminism is a movement where opinions are presented as facts and emotions are presented as evidence.

[DorkShitParticipant 4353]

VanXing wrote:

This law makes no sense. You are again putting more burden on a man be it an older man. Why don’t you put that mother of the woman with the child should be paying child support?

The burden always falls to a man.

The mother of the girl with the baby is a woman. But, you do have a point that is included in my mental synopsis.

A girl has one of three possibilities in her upbringing:
1. Raised by father in typical family dynamic.
2. Raised by step-father who white knighted, adoption, etc.
3. Raised by single mother.

So yes, in the instance of the single mother that would be the outcome.

One could say that whomever gives the bride away is responsible if she divorces under irreconcilable conditions.

My point is to concentrate on accountability. Accountability with a focus on the child’s interest.

And no, the woman is never held accountable by society. Only a man that is held accountable and feels the impact can effect the situation for the children’s best interest under the family umbrella.

Hence the saying for a father:
A son is a son until he takes a wife.
A daughter is a daughter for life.

This law would align the reality.

Peace brothers

[CatsPawParticipant 423]

If that was the law, females would not get married…

[narwhalParticipant]

Hell no. You think a father has any say in who his daughter marries and what happens in her bed? Can he now legally put her in a chastity belt? What if she commits a crime? Are you going to send Dad to jail too? If she’s over 18, she a legal adult responsible for her own actions. Dad can’t do a thing.

You think that grandfather has the ability to pay for a child, that he’s not even a legal guardian for?

The woman has 100% full control over the birth of the child. She has 100% control over whether she choses to divorce. She has declared herself 100% equal to men. She needs to be 100% responsible for her decisions.

People (women) will never behave responsibly if we refuse to make them accountable for their actions.

Ok. Then do it.

[VanXingParticipant 98]

Exactly what Nawal said! Makes no sense to put another man responsible for a women’s actions regardless of the relationship!!!

[Masculine_ManParticipant 2735]

Just get rid of alimony and make child support a joint contribution which both parties contribute.

If it costs you your peace of mind, then it is too expensive.

[NeroParticipant 1466]

How about this? Get rid of f~~~ing child support and grant 50/50 physical custody by default. Stop assuming the guy is a piece of s~~~ parent and that a woman NEEDS to be taken care of. I guarantee that alimony and child support are the number one motivators in divorces for women.

[Author]

Posts