Comtuter and Internet News Channel
Family code of the Russian Federation, says that the man and woman are equal in the solution of family matters. But in practice it means that 80% of marriages fail, on the initiative of women, women decide to have children …
The discrimination against men in the family law
Author – Alexander Biryukov
Family code of the Russian Federation (which I call anti-family), followed by the Constitution, says that the man and woman are in the field of family affairs. So whether it’s a let’s deal. To begin, I’ll remind you of some statistics.
The number of divorces in Russia for the first half of 2014 is just over 80% of the number of marriages. And the numbers vary on the region. In the Caucasus (Chechnya, Dagestan, Ingushetia) divorces 8-12% of the number of marriages. And, for example, in the Altai region (first quarter 2014) – 103%. This means that the number of divorces during this time is exceeded the number of marriages. Among the Russian population of cities (the numbers in the national republics), we can assume 90% of divorces.
In this case 80% of marriages fail, on the initiative of women. Weird, huh? We have always said that women, on the contrary, cling to the family that they want kids and home coziness. Want, but only the husband while they are mingled. Matriarchal family feminist Russia does not involve her husband at home. His apartment – Yes. His money – Yes. But he was not. Of course, if you look at polling. But what woman (what is the feminine aspect and I’m afraid of)? her husband needed a sperm donor was a sponsor and?
In 97% of cases, the court in the divorce selects children from men and passes them to the women. Thus, the courts follow the old, even during the early Soviet government, the decree of the Supreme Court. The time to read my article that I wrote in 2012 and which is more than relevant still. It is dedicated to women’s marriage.
In order not to spread the idea of the tree, starting with main:
The current (anti) family law and judicial practice of marriage, marriage and razvodnye aferizm, making divorce more profitable marriage and giving significant legal benefits and direct financial benefits to those with the decision of the court.
That’s basically the whole thesis, which tells us something very destructive sense.
Let’s move on to decoding.
Family code of the Russian Federation has deduced its essence from the family code of the USSR, almost without considering (or taking into account only formally) three factors.
The first factor is property. People had private property. Rather, it was before, but very minor, since private business was not (black marketeers and drug traffickers are not taken into account), no accumulation of capital. Apartments of ordinary people, giving heads – everything was public, i.e. the citizens did not belong. Neither sell nor bequeath. However, at the end of the Soviet rule appeared cooperative apartments, but they could neither sell nor bequeath. Any significant savings was not there. Now people have the opportunity to create capital. If during Soviet times, everyone was equally poor, now there are billionaires, millionaires, those who are struggling to make ends meet, and those who live below the poverty line, and the stratification of society is very significant – until of caste. Same here, even consider actually unemployed social mobility (one of the main features of the caste society): updated elite at the expense of the children of the elite, the middle class, the poor at the expense of children. If you trace the biology of the current politicians, oligarchs, it will be seen that all of them had a significant advantage over other people. I admit, there are individuals who are struggling from the bottom to the big bosses. But the number of such cases is so little that “rise” should not explain social mobility, and exceptional personal and professional qualities and devilish luck. Casuistry, not law. To move to a higher caste, not having exceptional personal and professional qualities, can only be “stuck” to the man of this caste, in other words, to find a “pusher” – not so important.
The second factor is morality, ethics, upbringing and, accordingly, people’s attitudes to fraud as such. In order not to indulge in empty debate, will agree that rogues were, are and will be in any order in any country. But as said Gleb Zheglov, the rule of law in the country is not determined by the presence of thieves, and the ability of the authorities to disarm them. I would rephrase and say that the rule of law is determined by the PROPORTION of speculators in society, SOCIETY’s ATTITUDE TO THEM and, of course, the ability of law enforcement to deal with them.
What would it be be? In the Soviet period (we will not take tsarist), materialistic, consumer attitude to the people was condemned. Preached philanthropy, altruism, team spirit, honesty. “Philistinism”, “materialism” was condemned. Now, living in a period of General “kidalovo”, we indulgently laugh at the Soviet morale, it seems false and pathetic. Currently: the ability to deceive our neighbor, is called “learning to live”, “business acumen”, “a commercial vein”. Of course, the ability to cheat somebody who trusts you, your partner, friend, colleague, no relation to the “case” or “business” is not. However, in troubled times, where our country was for over 20 years, all moral guidance is not only lost, but inverted. Instead of truth and trust appreciated the lie and distrust, instead, the partnership is a “Scam”. At the same time this way of life is advertised in the media, tabloid novels, movies (especially series). Children, adolescents, young people see that working, not a lot of money, and tricking, throwing and pressing, will be successful, rich, famous. You will envy the teenagers of the 90s (my peers) were jealous of the bandits and the bandits parents. Want to become an engineer, a doctor or officer was considered a sign of a “sucker”. And it’s not among the lower classes, and in a completely safe teen community of the middle class. Consumerism is so ingrained in the minds of the people that it became part of their essence. “Squeeze”, “throw” partner, to get involved in a Scam, anything, if only to get a coveted trinket. Any mention of morality or even common sense. But – most importantly – the SOCIETY IS NOT NOT ONLY NOT CONDEMN, BUT WELCOMES AND ENCOURAGES. In other words, near steel for men no more than a tool to achieve selfish interests, and society not against it.
And the third factor in the conflict men and women public opinion (and the court) always be on the side of women, whoever was really to blame. The reasons are discussed in chapters “Feminism” and “post-industrial period.”
These three moments, our (anti) the family code does not take into account.
1. People have that you can share;
2. People have an overwhelming desire to share someone else’s;
3. In a dispute men and women the man is a priori.
(Anti) family code and jurisprudence.
Read the RF IC:
Article 31. Equality of spouses in the family
2. The issues of maternity, paternity, upbringing and education of children and other issues of family life are resolved by the spouses based on the principle of equality of spouses.
3. Spouses are obliged to build their own family relationships based on mutual respect and mutual assistance, to promote the well-being and family strengthening, to care of the welfare and development of their children.
Yes, this is fine. But what happens in reality?
Maternity issues are resolved by the woman alone, since there is no law, normative act which in any way would be her husband (legal husband!) real impact on fertility. Abortion in law related to medical services equivalent to liposuction or a facelift. As long as there is law, there is no means of real influence on the woman single-handedly decided to have an abortion. She has the right to kill the unborn, even without informing his father.
Questions of paternity, oddly enough, is also solved by the woman alone! Lawful husband and the father has no right to decide their own – father – issues! Flies a woman and take it “on the belly” if they will kill the wanted child – as has has said, decides woman, and she’s the only one.
Now, remember that the issue of birth
(more importantly to this article) or narodenia of the child. Men have no leverage, in addition to beliefs (which is useless, if a woman is deliberately preparing for the fraud) and criminal methods (which are illegal and dangerous for obvious reasons).
“The spouses are obliged to build their family relationships based on mutual respect and mutual help, to promote well-being and strengthening families.” Sounds good. But considering the second factor (total Scam and consumerism), what is the probability that mutual respect, mutual help, promote well-being and strengthening families will not remain empty words? The probability is extremely small, and the proof of this divorce statistics, which in 2014 is more than 80% of the number of marriages. People were not used to negotiate, to get used to each other. The interests of men and women are purposefully contrasted. If there’s a long explanation?
Read on. Article 41 (“prenup”) tells us that there is a means of protecting their capital and investments to the family from the encroachments of the con or swindler. But, first, he, he can not regulate who remains children after divorce, and how the former spouses will be to contain them (which is very important and we will talk about that later). Secondly, as it turns out, already paragraph 3 of article 42 of SK prohibits marriage contract “to contain other conditions which put one of the spouses in the extremely adverse position or contradict the basic principles of family law”. The same is said in paragraph 2 of article 44. The wording is extremely vague, so the court is free to interpret it as you like and recognize void any prenup. What “fundamental principles of family law” and where these principles are found – generally a mystery.
So the marriage contract is in the law, in fact, is not worth much.
However, the central event of the marriage aferizm is a divorce, and, accordingly, the division of property, the struggle for the place of residence of the child (the “division of children”) and child support.
And then again, look at two interesting statistics.
From colossal the volume of divorces. Hard to believe that 80% of men in Russia polls were drunkards, maniacs, rapists, criminals and other scoundrels. Some of the real leads are immoral lifestyle, but certainly not 80%. However, here comes to the aid of another figure – 95-98% of children, the court leaves with her mother. The government of the time. No misogyny – the facts speak for themselves. This figure is so huge. On the contrary, in the year of the courts one hundred and twenty thousand of complaints from fathers who want the children to live with them. More than 50% of the fathers. Often men have a lot more favourable for children than mothers. But to no avail. Matriarchal, the court considers that to avenge his wife or not. When matriarchy always blame the man.
Maybe the clue in this?
Together with children, she gets herself to stay with her children. Often (in the case of a prearranged marriage fraud almost always) a housing, the amount of alimony and those fees, which will get ex-wife is blackmailing ex-husband’s children, makes quite a tidy sum.
It’s not even in the gender of the fraudster, and that the law jurisprudence is entirely on the side of one gender, at present women. If 95% of children remained with their fathers, I think, among men too, there would be unscrupulous types that would be engaged in marriage fraud. Though, the man’s problem would have been much much more, “chance to fly” he can not.
If the speculator knew that the children would stay with their father, then the divorce rate would be much less. Divorce would be disadvantageous. Even the probability of failure of 30% (in Sweden, for example) would significantly postupila dust savvy ladies.
So, here are the items that stimulate aferizm: a woman alone decides the issues of child birth, single-handedly solves the matter of divorce and that is guaranteed to get. And even with that which belonged to him before the wedding.
Indeed, in accordance with the ruling of the constitutional court, the parents are obliged to pay the alimony even if the property was acquired. BEFORE marriage or AFTER Barca. Thus, paying 25-50% of the income, the apartment, the apartment, the man, the man in the sale of this property will pay 25-50% of the amount received – that is the alimony which he has already paid! Thus, the real alimony does not represent 25-50% and 31-75% of the income of men. If he bought and sold the apartment twice, the percentage of “tribute” ex-wife increases.
Let us add that at present, a waste of the child support a parent (and in the 95-98% that of the mother) uncontrolled. The man has no legal control mechanisms that would be ex-wife alimony for a child or his new roommate-alphonse (Yes, do not be surprised, this happens very often). And sometimes mother’s drinking on children’s alimony.
Well, if a decent woman. Although, as is known, the impunity of “successful” experience of friends and stories told on TV and in glossy magazines, corrupt even the most decent and moral. And if a woman is initially focused on the Scam? And such persons are becoming more and more.
I get from the fathers, many letters, cases, which contain as complaints and request help. I see similar entries in social networks. History as if copied from each other: “I’m a wealthy man, married the girl, the wealth which was much below mine.” Lived normally, without scandals and excesses. sudden, for no reason. And now I actually lost my apartment and had to pay his wife alimony, which is 2-4 times the average daily income of citizens in the region. and beyond child support. “
Cheating husband, con artist, at least 18 years old, getting the opportunity not only comfortable, but often even well-off existence, they are not working. If in 5-7 years she will find another “sucker” and bear a child from him, the period of carefree life will last another 5-7 years. And if the child is disabled, child support will receive for life. Yes, as horrible as it sounds, I’ve heard such arguments from women (although, if you can call a woman a aasty creature that thinks so?).
I often hear: how can a woman take possession of the apartment? Very simple. The child has the right to 18 years to reside on the territory of the father and mother with him. And no one has the right to evict. So. But there are lots of ways to compel the former husband to “leave.” From criminal to legitimate brand, known since the Soviet times (for example, arranging in the apartment of the regular Sobieski numerous annoying and restless guests of his wife – to 23 o’clock in the evening she has the right to invite anyone. crime is not necessary: the man himself moves down to another living space of the thoroughfare.
And sometimes women are not particularly wise: just write a false denunciation of her husband, by having pre-child, mother-in-law. Yes, it is a crime. But more about that in the excitement forget.
Here you have three cases.
Three cases of the last appeals to me for help.
1. A man before marriage has opened a fixed deposit in a bank (half year) and put my savings. Two months later married, two years later, the wife filed for divorce. In court she demanded to divide the accrued amount of money for the marriage. Since interest is accrued every month and the income of arose during the marriage (similar to salary), the judge considers their property, their belongings together, and was divided in half. The amount of the husband’s interest earned was ex-wife, was a little less than one hundred thousand rubles. That is passive income with personal savings men, to whom the wife is irrelevant.
2. The second case is more interesting. The start is the same: premarital deposit men, interest. But the Deposit is over, and the man, being married, took the money to another Bank. After six months, divorce, and the wife demanded. Husband: he claims that the new contribution is the money he owns before the marriage, so do not have to share. Wife in court insisted that a new contribution has no relation to the premarital money, and consists of a joint family budget. To the question, what then happened to the money from the first Deposit that it give the answer can not (“Spent”). The judge has been asked for the withdrawal of the slip from the Bank and receipt of the first from the second. The amounts do not match (man summed up the sum up to the thousand: first bank took, for example, 857983 rubles 35 kopecks, and in the second put 857000 rubles). The judge found these different amounts, and therefore upheld the claim of the wife. As a result, she received half of all the premarital savings of her husband and half accrued over the period of the marriage percent. Percent, again, with the money amassed by man BEFORE marriage. Ie which wife had no relationship. The income of the wife from the con – about 400 thousand rubles. Going to appeal at least with respect to the amount of the Deposit.
3. The third case is more interesting, but harder. Male investor. He invests his own money in the company, receiving a share in the business. Having quite a few shares in different companies. For several years, he sells part of the shares, buys, sells again. I repeat, on their maiden money. General, family money. A few years later the divorce, and the wife is demanding, not only, but in the same way. The husband argued that they were bought with premarital money. But the judge ruled in favor of the wife, explaining. “When the apartment was bought before marriage, it’s yours.” But if you sold her in marriage, and bought her a new one, she was marital property. The man eventually lost 50% of the acquired property and 50% of their pre-marital capital.
However, he was able to appeal the decision and part of the funds. In the end, he lost more than 50% of premarital capital, but only 20 percent. This, of course, without taking into account the profits that brought the pre-marital capital in the marriage. That is, he turned the situation.
Conclusion. Anti-family laws and the same enforcement practices. Then there are people who have absolutely nothing to lose. And Gigolos (i.e. too poor), which are initially set to marriage with a rich woman for her money.
Any man having any capital, any money, property acquired before marriage, is under attack. The laws on the side of women, against the family and men. The court’s decision is almost always against men.
Of course, you can arrange around your own property, dance with tambourines, to make a clever scheme. And twitch, not throw it you, as-that described in the immortal. Comedy by Alexander Nikolaevich Ostrovsky “Bankrot”? You can organize some money in the Cayman Islands to spend a kiloton of time, Megawati money and terapascal nerves. Spinning a complex scheme to hide the money from his own wife.
However, the life of trillionaires shows that even dances with tambourines are not really work. Every year Forbes list.
When I hear a story about how poor girl wants to find (or found) a rich young man, I have the news. If girls are used to dream about the stamp in the passport, now they are dreaming about the two stamps in the passport.
I do not presume to say what is the percentage of scammers among the women. But, given the shaft of letters, complaints on the Internet and in other sources, I see that marriage fraud has long gone from the category of regrettable occasions and became a full-fledged and widespread type of fraud.
Speculators are hurting not only those that denied the ex-husbands property. They are discrediting all women: robbed man and his environment at all. To risk their capital, earned with great difficulty. Fundamentally many men shun marriage, and they have every right to.
But feminists are not satisfied. Them a little an existing the lawlessness of the fathers. They are the pincers of the bills that the man has after all. housing or a mortgage, if it’s homeless. Now such a bill is under consideration in the state. Of course, spending money on “spiritual needs,” the man also will not have the right to control. What the child needs, how much they cost and what the apartment would prefer to live in ex-wife, decides, she is alone. A couple of years ago, the state Duma Deputy Alexei Mitrofanov proposed to introduce a legal norm in accordance with which those who receipt alimony must report spending. As a long time ago, for example, of travel by persons. Just leave the checks and the question is removed. It would seem, is the fair requirement of the payer to know where the money goes. To be completely fair to the child, not the clubs, lover or vodka. But the initiative is not passed: Mitrofanova pounced on the whole Duma and stigmatized. Do not you dare infringe on matriarchal privileges for women, if you live in faminestricken society!
What do you think, dear reader, what, normal, sane, and wealthy man to marry, which will collapse with a probability of 80%, then it will lose all of your investment in the family, but still have to stay? Who in their right mind, would dare to tempt fate and put my head in the lion’s mouth? To marry without fear, now can either of the poor, who have nothing left to take away, or criminal elements, which, void sumnyashesya, just eliminated his ex-wife.
A way out of this situation. As it is discussed in a separate Chapter “What to do”.
What is the result? The result is the frankly antimessage of legislation, the formal marriage, then marriage is matriarchal, as opposed to the family. The conclusion of a formal marriage with a probability of 80% means that your family will fall apart, because this is statistics of divorce – breakups of most marriages. These are the facts, and there’s no arguing against them. One may cite the example yourself, your family and friends, but facts – figures – not going anywhere.
In the Patriarchal family of the official (religious) marriage, the introduction of the men in the head of the family. Like any boss, he acquired the rights and responsibilities that we consider in the Chapter “the Patriarchal family”. Like any boss, he had the ability to punish and reward. In his hands were the arms of real leadership. Additional obligations (to contain, to protect, etc.) offset by additional rights, like any boss, be it a Director of the company, the Minister or the commander of the regiment. The husband, the head of the family knew that divorce is not possible, and the children are guaranteed in the biological sense of the word. This means that the investment that he puts into the family, will not be lost. He will not take one. Wife will be with him forever. Children are his sons and daughters, and they are connected with him for life consanguinity. So the man was interested in to the maximum of resources in the family. Along with the woman at the time of marriage.
What does this mean, matriarchal marriage due to anti-family code? Guarantee the woman has been preserved in full, even beyond what is discussed in detail in the article on marriage fraud. What modern matriarchal marriage guarantees a man? Does he faithful to his wife, as the marriage is Patriarchal? No, the wife has the right to mate with anyone, and it is for nothing. The husband has a right to treason. He even divorce can not have children and property to give his wife. Does the man marriage is a strong family? No, and this is clearly evident from the statistics of divorce. And given the fact that 80% of divorces occur at the initiative of women, the marriage does not just happen. Does man have marriage that his children are biologically his? No, a woman has the right to give birth from anyone and nothing to tell her husband. According to statistics, every third father to another. Yes, he may get suspicious and sue, asking him to exclude his paternity through a DNA test. But first, it needs to suspect, and, secondly, a long and extremely humiliating court procedure for men, because the matriarchal court to exert pressure or even to openly mock. About the reaction of the public – and even men – to men’s desire to exclude paternity can be judged by the talk show on this topic. Hall, angry, zaplyvaet such men. By the way, for example, in Germany a man and it is not entitled. There are DNA tests on the initiative of men. Wife work up, and you are educate and not grunt. Enjoy a true Patriarchy.
Continue. Does it have a formal marriage, the preservation of a male investment in wife and kids? No, after a divorce (and it is almost guaranteed) the court of the day. And in addition assigns alimony tribute. This man has no right to check. For those who are still delusional that men do go from the family, I repeat: 80% of divorces occur at the initiative of women. Does marriage find a man of powers of the head of the family? No. Marriage gives the man no levers of real power in the family, does not give a man the right to lead the household. Every household can do what you like, and man has no right to prevent it. There are no powers of the head of the family, there is only duty: to contain, to please, protect, and nothing to deny. Does marriage have the right to have children? No, secret from your husband. The consent of man for an abortion is not required, though he thrice lawful husband.
What would it be be? Modern matriarchal marriage does not guarantee the man nor the safety of the investments, no strong family, no heirs, no loyalty wife. Wife at any moment to leave, taking the children and property. The official marriage, by contrast, tempts the woman to divorce, because wealthy men can tear sickly cake, but without marriage it is much more difficult to do.
Reader! What would you say if you offer to jump with a parachute, but you will know that the parachute of this design is in the air of the system with a probability of 90% to 100%, and the other not? I give up these lousy parachutes and will require others, and if no other, I will not jump.
By the way, in the settlements of the old believers, the number of divorces is much lower. In Chechnya only 12%. Conservatives, according to some, about 15%. There is a marriage and a family still carrying each other.
For completeness, here are two more provisions that are undeservedly forgotten.
1. Family capital can, but not father. Why is the father recognizes the unequal member of the family is unclear. Duties he and his wife equally, and that’s about right-sorry, move over. The more capital seems to be a family. The Ministry of Labor, in response to our inquiry, said that so she goes on maternity leave. But now take to care for. And it is not uncommon: I personally know two such cases. In the first case, a former classmate of mine, a surgeon, and the second employee of the Bank, where I had a salary card. Them who and how to compensate for the loss in salary? No one does.
2. If the court leaves the child under the age of 3 with her mother, she is entitled to claim maintenance. It is assumed that it is not working, and sitting with the child on maternity leave. But if the court is dead, a child is up to 3 years with the father, that man has no right to claim alimony for herself. Legislators felt that the maternity leave for anything in his day to 48 hours. And the money to fly.
Besides the already legalized cont