The reason these stories bother us is the one sided nature of the marriage contract.
I don't see that the woman has any legal obligation toward the man except in rare situations.
For example, I've seen situations where the woman has generated 80% of the assets in the marriage and keeps 80% paying no alimony because she earned it. In a similar situation, the man generated 80% of the assets and keeps 30% plus paying alimony to keep her in the style she is accustomed to.
It is a given that the woman should be maintained in the style she is accustomed to. Why should that only be true for the woman? If the man is used to sex every day, home cooked meals, housekeeping and companionship, why shouldn't he be kept in the style he is accustomed to? To our ears, it sounds absurd because there is nothing reciprocal in marriage.
I have yet to find any legal obligation the average wife has toward the average husband.
Why is marriage even called a contract? Maybe it should be labeled as an obligation, debt, or liability from a legal point of view.
I don't see that the woman has any legal obligation toward the man except in rare situations.
For example, I've seen situations where the woman has generated 80% of the assets in the marriage and keeps 80% paying no alimony because she earned it. In a similar situation, the man generated 80% of the assets and keeps 30% plus paying alimony to keep her in the style she is accustomed to.
It is a given that the woman should be maintained in the style she is accustomed to. Why should that only be true for the woman? If the man is used to sex every day, home cooked meals, housekeeping and companionship, why shouldn't he be kept in the style he is accustomed to? To our ears, it sounds absurd because there is nothing reciprocal in marriage.
I have yet to find any legal obligation the average wife has toward the average husband.
Why is marriage even called a contract? Maybe it should be labeled as an obligation, debt, or liability from a legal point of view.