From: payner@netcom.com (Rich Payne)
Subject: Re: If it's good for the goose..  was (Re: Back Again To (Un)Father - NOT!)
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1993 20:15:16 GMT

In article <16B4E7917.SURGDM@mizzou1.missouri.edu> SURGDM@mizzou1.missouri.edu (Diane) writes:
>In article <1993Jan5.200808.14645@netcom.com>
>payner@netcom.com (Rich Payne) writes:
> 
>>In article <168CEB513.SURGDM@mizzou1.missouri.edu> news@mont.cs.missouri.edu writes:
>>>You know, I'm a custodial parent. I'm getting the uncomfortable feeling
>>>that a lot of people think that raising a child (or two) alone is a piece
>>>of cake compared to writing out a support check once a month.
> 
>>You ignore the 80 hours (whatever) of work required to earn the money
>>which which to write the check. That is, neither is a "piece of cake".
> 
>Are you assuming that most custodial parents *don't* work outside the
>house, that they *don't* (like me) also spend a huge percentage of their
>paychecks on the children? Where are you getting this idea?

Absolutely not, in fact, this isnot germain to the specific point that I
was making, that the work was not the trivialized "writing out a support 
check once a month" as you phrased it. I said, and will say again, why
trivialize ---EITHER---?
  
>>
>>Why trivialize either?
> 
>I didn't. I'm objecting to what I saw as the vilification of (female)
>custodial parents.

Exactly which "vilification of (female) custodial parents" are you referring
to? There is none to object to. 
  
>>>                                              It would be pretty ridiculous
>>>to have the parent who makes the least money (and often spends the most time
>>>with the child) pay a higher % of his/her income than the wealthier parent.
> 
>>As I understand it, very few women, no matter how wealthy, pay any alimony
>>or child support if not the CP. I caught the tail end of Ophrah (sp?) last
>>night and the topic was alimony and child support. One of the women owned
>>a company and was ordered to pay for 2 years, she had not paid a cent, and
>>the courts did not attach her wages. It seems that in the same fashion
>>as 'a women cannot be sexist', we have the situatioon where there is and
>>cannot be such a thing as a 'deadbeat-mom'. If she does not pay, no big
>>deal, get a job. If he does not pay, things change radically, and not for
>>the better.
> 
>Your dragging in arguments from all over the board here. I don't receive
>or pay alimony, so I know very little about it. About 75% of my income
>goes to feed, shelter and clothe my children; as well as about 100% of my
>'free' non-working, non-sleeping hours. Their father spends about 1/12 of
>his income to support them and refers to (reasonable notification) time with
>the kids as 'babysitting'.

A good friend of mine once slept at work over a shed because that was the
only way to support his ex, her boyfriend, and her children. We can trade
stories, but I suspect that generally things somewhere in between.

>Not all NCP's are deadbeats (male or female). Not all CPs are stay-at-home
>parents who live off the other parent's paycheck. I am not trivializing
>anything here. I am objecting to the ridiculous stereotyping of female CPs
>as parasitic bitches from hell. 

I do not think so, since there has been no "ridiculous stereotyping of female 
CPs as parasitic bitches from hell". You make the most absurd assertions
when you get angry. Please try to respond to what I write rather than what
you hate. You might be surprised to know that they are not necessarily the
same thing.

>                                        There are always those who will take
>advantage of the system, any system, but these people are not to be confused
>with the larger percentage of people who behave ethically and with integrity.
>Examples that *some* abuse is occurring is not evidence that it is the norm.

What if the system is -designed- to treat one party unfairly? Then the issue
is not abuse of a good system, but a system which is not good. 
  
>Diane


Rich

payner@netcom.com  (who has not "vilified" EITHER parent)



Newsgroups: alt.feminism