Nat, you mustn't have equal rights to work, otherwise the family court wouldn't need to strip men inequitably of assets, on the basis that the wife hasn't the same income earning potential.
Right –noun 18. a just claim or title, whether legal, prescriptive, or moral:
Potential –adjective 1. possible, as opposed to actual:
Different income earning potential is not the same as not having the right to work. Unlike only 30 or 40 years ago, no one can say that a woman does not have the right to work. For example if a woman wants to work, she is allowed to get a job, and no one is legally allowed to prevent it.
Some women may not be able to earn as much as their partners, but we do have the right to work - see again my comment on equal pay for equal work.
Grammar lesson over now, but maybe you can explain why so many (not all of course) men begrudge every red cent their ex gets in settlement when she has to raise the kids after the divorce. If I had children, I would want them to have the best that I could afford even after a seperation, but from your above comment and various posts by others regarding the splitting of assets it sounds like some blokes don't want to contribute financially to their children's lives once the relationship is over in order to spite their ex's.
I do agree that men come out badly in custody hearings though, I always feel sad for the guys who really want to be a part of their kids lives but the woman dosn't allow it. Not fair to the kids either. I reckon a lot of blokes hang around in loveless marriages just so they can continue to be with the kids.