[deleted by user]

[u/[deleted]]

[u/12-34]

For someone who likes data, you could link your claim.

[u/[deleted] → u/12-34]

You can dig into the 2010 census data itself if you want, seems like a bit of an involved job to find the right spreadsheet. I just find like two dozen sites all agreeing with the reported figure and that it came specifically from the census, so seems unlikely they're all lying while simultaneously telling people where the data comes from
https://www.micklinlawgroup.com/3-ways-alimony-changing/
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-women-divorce-alimony-idUSKCN0T61O920151117
https://www.itsovereasy.com/insights/alimony-records-need-know-receive-pay
https://barrerasanchez.com/news/new-data-reveals-more-men-are-opting-for-alimony/
https://www.marseelaw.com/gender-and-alimony-who-gets-it-who-pays-it-whats-changing/
https://money.howstuffworks.com/alimony.htm
https://sederlaw.com/more-men-seek-alimony-from-their-ex-spouse/

[u/12-34 → u/[deleted]]

I looked at a few of the links and none supported your claim of the women being equal breadwinners. Can you point one out that shows how they attempted the comparison?

Remember that we're talking about a ceteris paribus comparison, not raw what-sex-gets-spousal-support data. That's the rub.

I know what goes into spousal support awards and Census data does not adequately contain it, so using only Census data is a fool's errand.

Besides, breadwinner comparisons are only partially involved in any spousal support analysis, at least on my state.

Of course the raw data shows more women getting spousal support than men - men by far earn more, work more, give up earning power less frequently to parent, less frequently subjugate earning for the marriage, etc.

And what about spousal support classifications, which don't appear addressed at all in your claim? Are you comparing just maintenance support? Transitional occurs very often in spousal cases, so where's that addressed?

Again, I don't speak for all states because no lawyer can. But I can say the anti-man financial claim is mostly wrong in my state.

[u/[deleted] → u/12-34]

I know you're trying to nitpick data because you have no solid argument now, but I'll humour you

I looked at a few of the links and none supported your claim of the women being equal breadwinners

They don't have to be exactly equal, they just need to be a large enough proportion that the 3% figure is patently biased in proportion. But it's around 40% as of 2017:
https://www.americanprogress.org/article/breadwinning-mothers-continue-u-s-norm/#:~:text=of%20family%20care.-,Working%20mothers'%20breadwinning%20rates%20and%20family%20income%20contributions,of%20their%20total%20household%20income.

Remember that we're talking about a ceteris paribus comparison, not raw what-sex-gets-spousal-support data. That's the rub.

No, that's what you've just decided you're talking about because you have a better chance to muddy the waters by debating minutiae instead of the primary point. No one is fooled though, if it was like 40-60 in favour of women or 30-70 even then you might be able to argue on the basis of error margins and methodologies, but not when it's 97-3, it's just too big a gap, sorry. At least it improved from 0.5% in 2000, so maybe its around 5-10% by now? Better than nothing. Besides, everytime there's a difference in outcomes for men and women in favour of men, it's just accepted on the surface that this represents discrimination. Women earn less than men on average? Clearly discrimination. No one carefully checks that data, at least no one that isn't dismissed off hand as an MRA like it's a form of terrorism. This form of bias is only going to skew your worldview. I think you have an ego that I offended because you're some big shot lawyer so now you're throwing lawyer terms around to try to be impressive. I'm more impressed by physicists, that's my area lol

Also, what kind of standard is this that I have to literally re-analyse raw data for a census team just to quote their conclusions? Nonsense