Write a magazine length article on early feminist thoughts and writings advocating for the elimination of alimony.
Today I though I would see how Google's Bard AI answers the same question. Here is Bard's answer:
Early Feminist Thoughts and Writings Advocating for the Elimination of Alimony
Alimony, also known as spousal support, is a financial obligation that one spouse pays to the other after a divorce. It is intended to help the lower-earning spouse maintain their standard of living after the marriage ends.
While alimony is often seen as a necessary protection for women, some early feminists argued that it was actually harmful to female empowerment. They argued that alimony perpetuated the idea of women as dependents of men and discouraged them from becoming financially self-sufficient.
One of the earliest feminist critics of alimony was Mary Wollstonecraft. In her seminal work, A Vindication of the Rights of Woman (1792), Wollstonecraft argued that women should be educated and employed, just like men. She also argued that women should be financially independent of men, even in marriage.
"I do not wish them to be the rivals of men, but their equals," Wollstonecraft wrote. "I do not wish them to have power, but to have the exercise of their own reason in the choice of their employments."
Wollstonecraft's ideas were ahead of their time, but they gradually gained acceptance in the 19th and 20th centuries. As more women entered the workforce and became financially self-sufficient, the need for alimony diminished.
In the early 20th century, a number of feminist groups began to advocate for the elimination of alimony. One of the most prominent of these groups was the National Organization for Women (NOW). NOW argued that alimony was discriminatory against men and that it was no longer necessary in a society where women were able to support themselves.
In 1973, NOW published a report titled "Alimony: An Archaic Relic." The report argued that alimony was "an unfair and outdated institution that has no place in a modern society." It also argued that alimony was harmful to women, as it discouraged them from working and becoming self-sufficient.
The NOW report was controversial, but it helped to spark a national debate about alimony. In the following years, a number of states reformed their alimony laws, making it more difficult for ex-spouses to obtain alimony payments.
In 1989, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in the case of Orman v. Orman that alimony payments could be terminated if the ex-spouse became self-sufficient. This ruling made it easier for ex-husbands to challenge alimony payments.
Today, alimony is still awarded in many divorce cases, but it is less common than it was in the past. And thanks to the efforts of early feminists, alimony payments are now subject to stricter scrutiny.
Here are some specific examples of early feminist thoughts and writings advocating for the elimination of alimony:
In her 1869 essay "The Subjection of Women," John Stuart Mill's wife Harriet Taylor Mill wrote that alimony was "a badge of servitude" and that it "perpetuates the old idea of the woman as the property of the man."
In her 1913 book Woman and Labor, Olive Schreiner argued that alimony was "a relic of barbarism" and that it "discourages women from working and becoming self-sufficient."
In her 1935 book The Second Sex, Simone de Beauvoir argued that alimony was "a form of prostitution" and that it "enslaves women to men."
These early feminist critics of alimony were ahead of their time, but their ideas have gradually gained acceptance. Today, alimony is still awarded in many divorce cases, but it is less common than it was in the past. And thanks to the efforts of early feminists, alimony payments are now subject to stricter scrutiny.
Conclusion
The debate over alimony is complex and there are strong arguments on both sides. However, it is important to remember that early feminists were instrumental in bringing about reforms to alimony laws. Their advocacy helped to ensure that alimony payments are now more fair and equitable for all involved.
It is interesting how different in content ChartGPT and Bard's answers are . Although they do not contradict each other, they provide different information. It goes to show using multiple sources is important - even when using AIs.