In July, I asked OpenAI's ChatGTP this question:

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 The report argued that alimony was "an unfair and outdated institution that has no place in a modern society."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. 

No Facts Needed

An AI system called Pre/Dicta is able to predict with 86% accuracy how a judge will rule all without looking at the law or facts in the case. 

What does the system look at? Things that have nothing to do with the case such as how rich the judge is and whether the lawyers come from large prestigious firms or not. 

What's happening: Pre/Dicta, which launched in 2022, looks for patterns in a judge's past decisions and potential areas of bias, using around 120 datapoints.

• Datapoints include where the judge went to law school, what their net worth is, how they rule when the lawyers are from big law firms versus boutique practices and the judges' history in public law, private practice and state judgeships.
• CEO Dan Rabinowitz, a former Department of Justice trial attorney, told Axios his AI model can now predict how a judge will rule with 86% accuracy — without even considering the facts of the case.
• "We don't look at the law or the facts — we entirely ignore that," Rabinowitz said, because judges write opinions in fewer than 2% of cases, and in the case of newly appointed judges, there's often no case data to work with.
• Rabinowitz said his system has reached 81% accuracy for predicting the decisions of new judges.

More evidence, I would even say damning evidence, our legal system has little if anything to do with justice. 

Women Paying Alimony

Of all the people receiving alimony just 3% are men. This despite a Supreme Court ruling in 1979 mandating gender neutrality for alimony. Alimony awards are probably the greatest discriminatory reality in the country other than military deaths. The discrepancy is even larger than workplace deaths where women compromise just 8.6% of fatalities. 

The core problem is that very few people care. Not many people are able to understand the implication of such discrepancies. We cannot eliminate discrimination agaisnt women without also eliminating discrimination against men. Indeed, it is difficult to even determine who is being discriminated against:

• Is the fact that women compromise 97% of alimony recipients due to society viewing them as less capable than men?
• Is the reason virtually all military deaths are men due to a pervasive belief that women are fragile and need to be protected by men?
• Is the reason why there are so few female workplace deaths because we view many jobs and too difficult for women? 

Our society would be so much better if we eliminated all discrimination.  

Relationship Violence By Gender

There is an interesting thread on Reddit about violence committed by women against men. In the linked article, there is a statement that men are core commonly the perpetrators; however, in the comments there are many links to other studies which state that the perpetrators are half women. 

How about we end all relationship violence whether committed by a man or woman. 

The comments in the tread are fascinating and often quite poignant. 

My ex-wife stated in a sworn affidavit I was violent and her the kids were scared of me. Then on the stand in court she stated she had never once been scared of me and that I had never threatened her in anyway. That is called perjury. Rather than being punished she received massive amounts of money from me. 

Indeed the only violence ever committed in the relationship was committed by her. She once slapped me, in fun, so hard I ended up with a deviated septum. Something that causes me problems to this day. 

As for the kids, they chose to live with me.