However I don’t believe that girls dressing sexily should be considered a form of sexual harrassment any more than boys being shirtless being considered such,both should be discouraged by all means for being unprofessional but that kind of thinking leads to all sorts of problems

This would have the effect of duplicating for the child as much as possible the arrangement before the dicvorce, minimizing the disruption the child experiences.

In the US at least when it has been adopted it has had the effect of reducing divorces, because spouses know they cannot get rid of the spouse they are divorcing totally, that they will have to go on raising the couple’s children jointly.

@Eivind
It *is* a very interesting thought experiment, no?
Still, I feel I showed great restraint when compiling the list.

We used to have such a system, and it could be horrid.

For situations in which a man sired a child outside of marriage, it was assumed and generally was the case, that he had no interest in raising the child. This was because the only men child support laws really addressed were the ones with enough money to make it worthwhile, and the only women they generally could have sex with outside of marriage were far beneath them socially, so they weren’t really interested in any kind of continuing relationship with either the women or the children.

And then in situations in which the father and mother were actually married, a man could generally only divorce his wife for infidelity. an unfithful women usually slunk away in disgrace and that was that, and the kids stayed with the father.

And then in some cases the father just ran out on his wife and left her with the kids. Ideally he should have paid child support, but he was gone after all, and in those days there was no way to trace him.

All threee options sucked in their various ways.

Eivind

Since men have always been valued according to how they perform, there is no tradition of caring for men’s social situation or emotional life. Thus, there is no real system in place that cares about men’s psychosocial situation after a divorce. Nobody cares if the man can’t see his children, and society doesn’t care if the man commits suicide.

A level playing field would help when it comes to evaluating the need for finanacial and social capital for mothers and fathers.

For financial it seems it is assumed that in the event of divorce and regardless of custody arrangements the mother must at a disadvantage. So in order to address this we have alimony and child support. On the other hand it is assumed that (regardless of the custody arrangement) the father must have had the advantage. So in order to address this he must give up a portion of his income to set the balance. Now I have no problem with this when the father actually does have the financial advantage but these days it is just assumed that he does and awardings are based on those assumptions.

For social it is assumed that in the event of divorce and regardless of custody arragements or predivorce conditions the father must not have cared about the child because he was out of the house most of the time (nevermind that he was sacrificing that family time for the career supported the family). So since he didn’t care before why should he has any custody now? Whether or not he has any post divorce financial obligations a dad should have visitation unless proven unfit. And I mean proven unfit, none of that bull where the wife makes an accusation and the deciding bodies just “err on the side of caution” (meaning they are too lazy to actually check it out so they’ll just assume its true).

I think that kind of research already exists. Does anyone have a link?

Most females choose male partners who are several years their senior. In addition, couples who live together usually have a joint economy (I.e. their paychecks go into a common account). Since the male usually is older and therefore earns more, the female gains an advantage.

This is an aspect that seldom if ever is addressed in feminist discourse. In an masculinist world, I would like to see more research on couples joint economy - for instance: which gender spends more of the joint finances on personal items?

Here in Sweden, the financial situation for divorced men is more reasonable. The horror stories I’m hearing are about women falsely accusing their ex-husbands of violence or sexual assault - and merely alleging such a thing can be enough to keep the father away from the children for years. Even in “clean” custody battles the mother gets the children more than 90 percent of the time. Similarly to what you describe, child support is enforced more vigorously than child visitation, and the mother doesn’t get punished for abducting the children.

These are tough issues, and it all comes back to the balance between financial and social capital. How do we value and even trade those two assets?