LW and No-Fault Divorce

[TheRedChamber]

In your scenario, the husband didn't have to have committed adultery; just be willing to introduce fake evidence suggesting he had.

I think I now have a story based around how socially awkward this situation would be - going into a hotel room with a working girl and just sitting there in silence for the required time. ("Okay four minutes are up","No, you're staying for at least twenty")

The problem is I've been watching too much Seinfeld recently so this is now appearing in my consciousness as a diner post-mortem scene rather that the British period scene it's supposed to be. ("She was there, I was there, there was an awkward pause and suddenly I'm offering her an extra twenty," "You slept with the fake prostitute who was helping you get out of your marriage?" "What was I SUPPOSED TO DO Jerry.")

I think I probably need to speedread P.G. Woodhouse again to get the tone right.

 

[Bramblethorn]

In your scenario, the husband didn't have to have committed adultery; just be willing to introduce fake evidence suggesting he had.

There is that option, and I think some people did do that. But perjury is a pretty serious thing in itself, not necessarily the lesser of evils.

The husband would have been the fall guy in this system because a man screwing around did much less damage to him than the wife.

Yep, that's what I was saying: "social consequences for an adulterous woman were generally much rougher than for the man".

 

[Bramblethorn]

I think I now have a story based around how socially awkward this situation would be - going into a hotel room with a working girl and just sitting there in silence for the required time. ("Okay four minutes are up","No, you're staying for at least twenty")

The problem is I've been watching too much Seinfeld recently so this is now appearing in my consciousness as a diner post-mortem scene rather that the British period scene it's supposed to be. ("She was there, I was there, there was an awkward pause and suddenly I'm offering her an extra twenty," "You slept with the fake prostitute who was helping you get out of your marriage?" "What was I SUPPOSED TO DO Jerry.")

I think I problably need to speedread P.G. Woodhouse again to get the tone right.

My work here is done. *vanishes in a puff of smoke*

 

[lovecraft68]

This thread reeks of male victimhood and bitterness.

I'm not surprised.

Before anyone says it, my first marriage ended in divorce, and over her infidelity (final straw in what was really a trainwreck marriage), joint custody with the kids living with her-at first, they would eventually come live with me by their choice as they grew older, child support-which I never missed, and always helped beyond that-and all the other "evil' things men cry about.

Yet somehow, I maintained a great relationship with my kids, had some fun, then when I felt I wanted to be serious again met an amazing woman who I married, and never looked back. The divorce was a favor to me in just about every way. Same for a lot of men and women.

But as always, the most vocal on the any topic are the whining 'victims'

Grow up, man up, and suck it up, buttercup; many of us have been there.

 

[alohadave]

But perjury is a pretty serious thing in itself, not necessarily the lesser of evils.

If it was a known tactic, I'm sure that judges were aware of the practice and mostly turned a blind eye to it to help facilitate the divorce. Unless either party admits to the judge that they lied, I doubt that it would be questioned in open court.

 

[OverconfidentSarcasm]

This thread reeks of male victimhood and bitterness.

[...]

But as always, the most vocal on the any topic are the whining 'victims'

Grow up, man up, and suck it up, buttercup; many of us have been there.

Uh... no offense, mate. But, you DO realize that, out of the fifteen participants in this thread, the "most vocal" ones are OP (who keeps posting superficially related articles to try and prove some point), Bramblethorn (who keeps disproving OP's proof)... and you, right?

 

[Bramblethorn]

If it was a known tactic, I'm sure that judges were aware of the practice and mostly turned a blind eye to it to help facilitate the divorce. Unless either party admits to the judge that they lied, I doubt that it would be questioned in open court.

Quite likely not. But even if everybody's cool with accepting the fiction in that particular scenario, it seems like a bad idea to get people comfortable with perjury. The next thing they perjure themselves about might not be so harmless.

 

[lovecraft68]

Women are victims because of society and circumstances said society still treat as a joke

Men are victims by choice.

Every time divorce comes up in discussion the whiners and woman bashers, and mansplainers come out in droves to revel in victimhood.

 

[MillieDynamite]

Now, now, my dear @lovecraft68, don't pull your punches. Tell us what you really think!

Women are victims because of society and circumstances said society still treat as a joke

Men are victims by choice.

Every time divorce comes up in discussion the whiners and woman bashers, and mansplainers come out in droves to revel in victimhood.

 

[desecration]

Men are victims by choice.

That's a brutal argument against marriage.

 

[lovecraft68]

That's a brutal argument against marriage.

Guys like you are an argument for more lesbian relationships.

 

[MillieDynamite]

Belly laugh, once again, we have a mini fight consisting of traded barbs. Come on boy's, keep up the exchange, That's Entertainment!

 

[lustychimera]

I think we could all use more lesbian relationships in our lives.

 

[inka2222]

That's a ....

Don't bother. These are mostly man-hating bullies (including men). They don't have empathy for any man, except sometimes the men a woman cheats with. Arguing with them wastes time and has less results than arguing with a wall.

Leaving aside examples from their own work, look at the story being discussed and the reactions:
* Man finds his wife cheated. Doesn't do anything bad other than "not feel awful because a woman who treated him like shit for months and betrayed him is dead". Gets pilloried in the comments.
* Woman finds her husband cheated. Shoots both cheaters. Not a single person in the thread found anything wrong with the character.

 

[Plathfan]

Don't bother. These are mostly man-hating bullies (including men). They don't have empathy for any man, except sometimes the men a woman cheats with. Arguing with them wastes time and has less results than arguing with a wall.

Leaving aside examples from their own work, look at the story being discussed and the reactions:
* Man finds his wife cheated. Doesn't do anything bad other than "not feel awful because a woman who treated him like shit for months and betrayed him is dead". Gets pilloried in the comments.
* Woman finds her husband cheated. Shoots both cheaters. Not a single person in the thread found anything wrong with the character.

Actually, a crime of passion makes more sense in these scenarios than an indifferent spouse riding off into the sunset after their partner’s death.

You and others like you don’t get empathy here because you took your trauma, hijacked an erotic category on a porn site, and twisted it into your own private hell: a place to scratch at open wounds and retch up the same stories, again and again, for eternity.

 

[mirafrida]

Something I haven't seen done here, but has potential for an interesting story: back in the day, when an English couple wanted a divorce but didn't have access to no-fault, the standard way to do that was for the husband to deliberately get caught committing adultery - he'd go to a hotel with some other woman, they'd get the maid to testify that she'd seen them enter the bedroom together. And then the wife could use that as grounds for divorce.

So the law actually pushed people to commit adultery that they otherwise might not have, as the only way to get out of a marriage that neither party wished to perpetuate.

I came across this article (written in the 1920s) not too long ago which I found interesting. It describes a similar scenario in the US
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1924/08/shall-i-divorce-my-wife/648058/

 

[Bramblethorn]

I came across this article (written in the 1920s) not too long ago which I found interesting. It describes a similar scenario in the US
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1924/08/shall-i-divorce-my-wife/648058/

Thank you, that was a fascinating read. Really shows the absurdity of requiring people to jump through hoops and find a scapegoat when both of them want to end it amicably.

 

[Djmac1031]

I'm not gonna get sucked in

I'm not gonna get sucked in

I'm not gonna get sucked in

I'm just here for the comments.

 

[inka2222]

You and others like you don’t get empathy here because you took your trauma,

I don't have trauma, you idiot. I have these things called ethics and morals and empathy, and I can empathize with victims of cheating. You can only empathize with cheaters.

Then you use "it's just art" as an excuse, which doesn't fly with us, normal people. "Triumph of the will" was "art" too. So was "Pavlik Morozov" story.

The fact that your strongest "argument" (and only one it seems) is an attempted personal attack, pretending the only reason someone can have this opinion is "trauma", shows just how weak your position is.

For the record, my personal position on LW, stated repeatedly, is that if the site owners had any brains, they'd split it up into two, or even 3 unrelated categories:
* Swinging/open marriage and other erotic/kinky stuff
* [optional] Voluntary cuckolding. Maybe fold it with swinging, but I like smaller neater categories. Or fold it into "Fetish" category.
* Cheating wives (NOT "LW" - you have no idea how many people come to the category and have no idea that the name has nothing to do with EITHER half of contents)

 

[MillieDynamite]

I write a lot stories featuring socially unacceptable people—murderers who get away with, well, Murder. Vampires who kill and make more vampires. Werewolves, cheaters, prostitutes, unethical businessmen and women, vigilantes, serial rapist, serial killers. It doesn't mean I support any of those activities. Cuckolding is a popular genre on every booksite out there. When a story is marked, what is about, only an idiot reads it, not expecting to be offended when they have issues with the morals that aren't supported in the story.

I am not attacking anyone; I'm pointing out that most of the stories tell you what they are about from the get-go, so those who read them and are offended want to be. Right or wrong, a Loving Wives tag (even on Amazon), more often than not, is about cheating.

I don't have trauma, you idiot. I have these things called ethics and morals and empathy, and I can empathize with victims of cheating. You can only empathize with cheaters.

Then you use "it's just art" as an excuse, which doesn't fly with us, normal people. "Triumph of the will" was "art" too. So was "Pavlik Morozov" story.

The fact that your strongest "argument" (and only one it seems) is an attempted personal attack, pretending the only reason someone can have this opinion is "trauma", shows just how weak your position is.

For the record, my personal position on LW, stated repeatedly, is that if the site owners had any brains, they'd split it up into two, or even 3 unrelated categories:
* Swinging/open marriage and other erotic/kinky stuff
* [optional] Voluntary cuckolding. Maybe fold it with swinging, but I like smaller neater categories. Or fold it into "Fetish" category.
* Cheating wives (NOT "LW" - you have no idea how many people come to the category and have no idea that the name has nothing to do with EITHER half of contents)