Why are men forced to provide resources outside of marriage and mated pair-bond for the first time in history?

Why do men lose custody (by default), isolated from their families, and forced to support a ';family'; that is never going to be his again. How is this different from, or any better than, rape?Why are men forced to provide resources outside of marriage and mated pair-bond for the first time in history?
This is because the feminists vision of the new matriarchy is slightly different than the one we knew before patriarchy. It is what I like to call viral matriarchy because it uses some of the systems of the patriarchy much like a virus might use the hosts bloodstream for its own purposes.





Under patriarchy, women sacrifice their right to sexual promiscuity and the exclusive right to parenthood in exchange for support from a male provider. However, women have recently identified in the legal system (an aspect of patriarchal civilization) an alternate route for securing this male support. Rather than eliciting the desired behaviour from males, they now simply convince the government to use its enormous powers of coercion to force men to fall into line and comply with their wishes.





Basically they are able to get the financial support of a husband (which is all they really want men for) but without any reciprocal obligations on their part and without sacrificing their right to have promiscuous sex with other men.





@ I eat License plates: Why thank you :)Why are men forced to provide resources outside of marriage and mated pair-bond for the first time in history?
It really isn't against men. Men just happen to be the one who often chooses to leave the house. Once you leave that house, you're going to have to fight damn hard for what you left behind. They say that posession is 9/10's of the law.





Everyone loses in that ';family';. Not just the mother or father, but the children have significant loss. They'd love to see their family back together - as one unit again. But, they cope with the changes and slowly learn to enjoy the differences between their 2 homes.





ETA: The law wants parents to have 50/50 custody of the children. Those who are unable to adequately care for their children 50% of the time then have visitation ordered. Believe it or not, the law believes that mothers and fathers are equal.
Well in the past, couples remained married even if the relationship lost its sizzle. Adultery was rampant, closeted, tolerated. Of course, women were forced to tolerate it because it was the only option they had to maintain reasonable security for themselves and the children.





In today's society we view relationships as disposable, but the children they produce are not. It's a social conundrum not unlike the ethical dilemma we face as a result of technology advancing too quickly. What appears to be a good short term solution has negative effects long-term.





Of course, I object to your rape analogy, as any rape survivor would.


You were a willing participant in creating those children, you need to uphold the associated responsibility. You DO have a choice, ya know...you could choose marriage and family life. Marriage is not what you see in fairy tales, and ';happily ever after'; only comes to those who work for it.
The court decided that a woman's relationship with her offspring begins at conception while a man's relationship begins at birth. This overly simplistic and grossly inaccurate assumption completely ignores those who plan for and hope for children, often years or even decades before that realization, in which the relationship with the child-to-be has developed from a life-long commitment and pursuit.





It is a rather distasteful state of affairs.
because men are lower than worms according to the US legal system.