Now that gay marriage is legal, will men still be victims of divorce cases for child support, child custody, and alimony?

If 2 women divorce, will they both be favored? If 2 men divorce, will they both be exploited? Does this mean divorce law equality? Or are we still going to put straight (white) women on a pedastal and give them everything?


Most Helpful Guy

  • You could just cohabit instead of marrying, but to answer your question the legality of gay marriage has no effect on the divorce of a heterosexual couple. Divorce laws are draconian, and I do think the responsible person in the marriage is usually the one who gets fucked over. The courts only go by income and assets, and personal behaviour, faults and choices hold no legal bearing. A judge may consider adultery, drug addiction, alcoholism, or irresponsibility in their divorce ruling, but they are not legally obligated to do so. The only thing a fault divorce does, is it expedites the divorce through the court system. No fault vs a fault divorce has no legal bearing on the division of assets, income or debts.

    • The whole reason why it was passed in the first place was because Obama argued that every person has a right to transfer assets, resources, estates, property, etc. That marriage, being a legal contract, should allow anyone to choose who receives those assets. So why doesn't that set any precedent for the division of assets in the divorce of heterosexual couples?

    • @asker Because if you give money to the irresponsible party, they will generally blow it on the economy. The responsible person is normally the fiscally responsible one. Spenders have a mentality more of a consumer, and therefore by giving them hard earned money that isn't theirs, they can blow it on their drug addiction, fashion, alcohol, partying, clothes, etc.


Have an opinion?


Send It!

What Girls Said 1

  • Yes, if 2 men divorce, all benefits go to 2 women who divorce.

    • Im assuming based on your response that you're seeing this from a moral or ethical standpoint. But I am looking at it as this: if gender no longer prevents legal contracts for the transfer of estates/assets, then why would gender be a factor in division of estates during divorce? Straight men have always historically been discriminated, harrassed and openly shamed during divorce. The women is favored in child support, custody, alimony, and property. And if she finds a new partner, she can have several sources of income to support her current lifestyle. Not just whats necessary for the kids, but her LIFESTYLE!!! All while man has his property, children, and income confiscated from him. His lifestyle is completely changed for the worse, no matter what, such that her lifestyle is pillowed and comfy.

    • Whoops. I thought it was clear what I meant. What I meant to say was
      "Yes, if 2 gay men divorce, all benefits go to 2 lesbian women who divorce."
      You know, to keep that double standard alive.

What Guys Said 4

  • i guess they'd arrange beforehand who'd wear da pants in this marriage, no?

  • Gay people are a vast minority and will barely be a drop in the scale of this topic

  • Wtf. If you dont think feminism is rampant in this country, you have a serious problem.
    Men are being shit on constantly. This is not something that is going to change simply because gays now have rights.

    One does not have anything to do with the other.

  • Those are completely different issues.

    Seriously, give it a break, even for just a day, will you?

    • They may be somewhat different issues, but the legality of gay marriage sets a precedent. Because now that gender cannot prevent people from marrying or transferring estates/assets, then why would gender matter in a divorce between heterosexual couples? Why does a straight woman get favored in those cases?