Sex change = no more alimony? I think not

[Jaymes]

If you have the money to have a fake penis surgically attached to your body then you don't need alimony.

So how many more assumptions would you like to make about just what he's had done to his body? He could have had anything from chest reconstruction to a hysterectomy.

And are you aware just how offensive the term "fake penis" is to trans men?

 

[Zephyr]

And are you aware just how offensive the term "fake penis" is to trans men?

Well, what would be the proper term? The description seems to fit pretty well.

Alimony is pretty stupid, but if the guy agreed to pay, then I don't see how a sex change fits into it all.

 

[fullyveiled muslimah]

I don't know how alimony works in the secular laws, but according to Islam a woman is due 3 months of mantainance regardless of who's fault it was for divorcing. The children go with the father, (unless she's breastfeeding or they're really young like that) as to relieve her of teh burden of trying to work and see to the immediate needs of the children. Point is, the money is to be given for three months only and no longer. I don't understand having to pay for years and years. Like if the other person works and they get married again, why do they need to still be maintained by an old ex? How long is this woman supposed to be in this guys pocket?

I don't understand the laws and rules surrounding the alimony system......someone be kind enough to give a little synopsis please?

 

[Quoth The Raven]

I don't know how alimony works in the secular laws, but according to Islam a woman is due 3 months of mantainance regardless of who's fault it was for divorcing. The children go with the father, (unless she's breastfeeding or they're really young like that) as to relieve her of teh burden of trying to work and see to the immediate needs of the children. Point is, the money is to be given for three months only and no longer. I don't understand having to pay for years and years. Like if the other person works and they get married again, why do they need to still be maintained by an old ex? How long is this woman supposed to be in this guys pocket?

I don't understand the laws and rules surrounding the alimony system......someone be kind enough to give a little synopsis please?

I'd see that more akin to child support than alimony...if the children are young enough that they don't go with the father, is she entitled to longer than three months support because she can't be 'relieved of the burden' of her children, or is it just a flat 3 months no more, regardless of circumstance?
You're not the only one who doesn't understand alimony...I'm not even sure we have it here, and I'm damn sure that while I think their father should be responsible for helping to maintain his children, I wouldn't want him to be supporting me.

 

[Ciscokid]

So how many more assumptions would you like to make about just what he's had done to his body? He could have had anything from chest reconstruction to a hysterectomy.

And are you aware just how offensive the term "fake penis" is to trans men?

I was trying to make a point that the person here has the money for expensive, unnecessary surgery and therefore the idea of alimony is even more rediculous than it normally is.

I don't know why "fake penis" is offensive, that's exactly what it is. If this trans *man* doesn't accept reality for what it is...........well I guess it would be the second time now. :help:

 

[Ðanisty]

I don't know why "fake penis" is offensive, that's exactly what it is. If this trans *man* doesn't accept reality for what it is...........well I guess it would be the second time now. :help:

Um...this post, to me, is even more offensive than the last one...

 

[Jaymes]

I was trying to make a point that the person here has the money for expensive, unnecessary surgery and therefore the idea of alimony is even more rediculous than it normally is.

Unnecessary? Do you even listen to yourself? What would you suggest he do; be a man and deal with breasts, periods, hormone swings, and all the stuff his body threw at him because he happened to be born with XX genes rather than XY?

I don't know why "fake penis" is offensive, that's exactly what it is. If this trans *man* doesn't accept reality for what it is...........well I guess it would be the second time now. :help:

Care to explain just what you mean by that?

 

[standing_on_one_foot]

"It's illegal for a man to marry a man and it should likewise be illegal for a man to pay alimony to a man," said John McGuire, one of Roach's attorneys.

That's not entirely true, though. It may be illegal for a man to marry a man, but it's not illegal for a man to be married to a man, oddly enough. Once you're legally married, it doesn't matter what gender people end as up; the marriage is still valid.

And since this is Florida, no less, where they won't do legal gender changes, he hasn't got much of a case at all, legally.

So, assuming that you consider the concept of alimony valid, which our court system does, then yes, I'd say the judge's ruling is a correct one. Of course, the question of the validity of alimony is an entirely seperate matter...

 

[standing_on_one_foot]

I was trying to make a point that the person here has the money for expensive, unnecessary surgery and therefore the idea of alimony is even more rediculous than it normally is.

I don't know why "fake penis" is offensive, that's exactly what it is. If this trans *man* doesn't accept reality for what it is...........well I guess it would be the second time now. :help:

Well...you assume that he's going to get surgery at all. Most transmen don't, since it's extraordinarily expensive, painful, rather ineffective, and a lot just don't find it necessary (as a friend of mine put it, "If I had that much money, I'd rather get house," although given he said it in San Diego, that is exaggerating the cost a little...but still). Quite likely, he hasn't got the money for it.

And it's not so much "fake penis" that's offensive, since believe me, we've all noticed what our genitals are and are aware of what surgery can do and not do. It's more the tone of your entire post, although I suppose it's not uncommon to find dismissive accusations of delusion...