this post was submitted on 14 Feb 2025
423 points (96.7% liked)

memes

11973 readers
1900 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to [email protected]

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/AdsNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.

A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment

Sister communities

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Tenthrow
The_Picard_Maneuver
[email protected]
423
It's pure coincidence (lemmy.world)
submitted 6 days ago by The_Picard_Maneuver to c/memes
37 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 days ago (1 children)

It just seems like a lot of work for courts to try and find out which partner made the personal relationship such that it ended, how much of it was from which partner, what was the real personal life of a couple and so on. Just seems a bit ludicrous for a court to be dealing with.

Not all contracts are made equal. But I guess a simple fix would be to have "until one side wants to end the partnership" in there. Though I think isn't that what the law already says?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

It’s all comes down to money and assets. The way it works in the US is, broadly, they get half of your shit unless you signed a prenup.

This is ironically a callback to old school patriarchal structures where a woman divorcing her husband often did not have any marketable skill sets because they were housewives. The courts saw fit to have the husband continue providing for them until they are self supporting- conceptually.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 days ago

It’s all comes down to money and assets. The way it works in the US is, broadly, they get half of your shit unless you signed a prenup.

That is a weird way of putting it. In a marriage, it is both of your stuff, which is why it is not so unreasonable to divide it equally. Obviously if you have only been married for a day then this is not so just, but I think for this reason that in some localities not everything you own immediately transitions to being co-owned.

This is ironically a callback to old school patriarchal structures where a woman divorcing her husband often did not have any marketable skill sets because they were housewives. The courts saw fit to have the husband continue providing for them until they are self supporting- conceptually.

That is alimony, which is a separate thing that only applies I'm this specific case.