‘Manimony’ Less Rare Than Formerly

Family Law

Posted May 22, 2008, 06:20 pm CDT
By Martha Neil

Only four percent of divorced women pay alimony to their ex-husbands, in part because men, as a group, make more.

But men, when they are the lower-paid spouses, are entitled to such post-divorce support while they get back on their feet again, just the same as women. And, although some are embarrassed to seek it, the practice of women paying so-called manimony to their ex-husbands is becoming a bit less unusual, reports CNN.

Although both sides tend to keep quiet about it, women who pay alimony to their ex-husbands represent about 10 percent of her clients, says Nancy Chemtob of Chemtob Moss Forman & Talbert in New York City. "When I first started 14 years ago, that number was zero."

Comments

Report Abuse

Posted by msg - 3 months, 2 weeks, 2 days, 12 minutes ago

This is the dirty little secret about the women’s liberation movement - they don’t really want “equal rights.” I had many female clients that earned much more than their husbands and the thought of paying alimony to them, even temporarily, made them crazy, almost homicidal. They were the worst of my clients. And I have to say, the court system wasn’t much better, they are still lagging behind the times, ususally the awards were less than a women would have got and for much shorter durations. If women are going to be out there and want to make a good wage and they enter into a marriage with a spouse who earns less than them, they better expect that if their marriage ends, spousal support is a fair and just reality, just as it would be if the roles were reversed. These women need to get honest with themselves and grow up!
Posted by gdd - 3 months, 2 weeks, 2 days, 6 minutes ago

Yup. What msg said.
Posted by JS - 3 months, 2 weeks, 1 day, 23 hours, 8 minutes ago

I am horrified that there are that many women out there who would think this way! (I’m not doubting it, just offended that they exist in such great numbers.) I am a woman and the primary wage-earner in my marriage by a long shot. If my husband and I ever did divorce (which will hopefully never happen), I would fully expect to pay a fair and reasonable alimony to him. The factors that are considered in alimony SHOULD be gender neutral --- i.e., looking at the situation of the payor spouse and of the payee spouse, without regard to gender. I truly hope we get to that point as a society. I am already there.
Posted by Betsy - 3 months, 2 weeks, 1 day, 22 hours, 34 minutes ago

The thing that irks me most about this is the term “manimony"-- it is right up there with “man-purse.” The word for the former is “alimony,” the word for the latter is “bag” or “sachel.”

Are men so insecure in their masculinity that they must append “man” to the word for everything they do that is traditionally associated with women? Its the same stupid impulse that lead to Amelia Erhart being called an “aviatrix” back in the day.

I blame the media, and I’m sorry to see the ABA Journal perpetuating this stupid “manimony” term.
Posted by Jamie - 3 months, 2 weeks, 1 day, 20 hours, 53 minutes ago

I personally don’t believe in alimony in any form. Anyone willing to gamble with their financial independence should be willing to live with the consequences. That said, I make more than my husband and should we split up, fair is fair, I guess.

but I hardly think the idea that women would go ballistic at the idea of paying alimony to their exes is shocking. I have a feeling men feel similarly.
Posted by msg - 3 months, 1 week, 4 days, 23 hours, 13 minutes ago

This comment is to Jamie - What would happen if you were to become disabled during your marriage? And you could no longer work and your spouse supported your for years and then you divorced. Would you want alimony then? You certainly would need it. There are many legitimate reasons for alimony. Many spouses put the other spouse through school (law or medical) and stay married for some years at the sacrifice of their own career only to be left later. Is that fair because now they do not have the earning power the other spouse does? What about a spouse who stays home and raises the kids and which allows the other spouse to work and progress in his/her career and increase his/her earning power? Should they divorce, should the spouse that stayed home to raise the kids, with little to no work skills be penalized when that was the marital arrangement? Those arrangements were made in good faith, they were marital contracts, enforceable contracts, just as any other business contract. They should not be viewed as callous gambles with one’s financial future as you put it and the losing spouse should have to just “live with the consequences.” Alimony serves a legitmate purpose and has only got a bad name over the years because men who have traditionally been the ones to pay it have bitched and moaned about how unfair it is. In 90% of the cases it is not unfair. However, I do think that a women who receives alimony, if she is able, has an obligation to try to increase her skills through education or other means so as not to remain forever dependent upon the paying spouse. And in many states, alimony is limited to a number of years for that very reason. In some cases, alimony is not limited to a number of years and goes forever until the recipient spouse remarries. In those circumstances, there can be problems and is is incumbant upon the paying spouses lawyer to put in certain limitation clauses which are beyond the scope of this comment.
Posted by Pat - 3 months, 5 days, 16 hours, 39 minutes ago

According to the Department of Labor’s Bureau of Labor Statistics, more than a quarter of working women now make more than their working husbands. Yet the article states that “Only four percent of divorced women pay alimony to their ex-husbands, in part because men, as a group, make more.” One wonders why the author of the Journal article feels the need to provide an excuse for the obvious gender bias?

Commenting has expired on this post.

ABA Journal - Law News Now

Family Law