But the redpill is good sio? You know if your reach husband takes the pill kesho unaachwa kwa mataa? 
I actually learned about Mgtow recently from ktalk, I must agree that some of those guys have good ideas that can help our confused sons in future
I will get half of everything,so that’s not a bad,mataa to be achwad then I will get a,man half my age. So either way me niko poa. Mwanamke hana hasara!
Red pill is a cult for men who are failures. That’s why my husband would never swallow it. Have you seen a successful, wealthy,handsome man in the cult. Ni wale tuu hawana,muelekeo. The failures with low reasoning capacity who are swallowed by this cult.A man who can believe that he is a victim of a woman is plain retarded. No self respecting man wants to be associated with a cult with a,victim mentality! The negative ideologies taught abt women are actually what tht cult hails. Its a kind of reverse psychology. You demonize the values you extol in other people groups! Like ur corrupt n luv corruption but demonize it in other people. The worst part of red pill is that its mother is feminism. Without feminism redpill have no scapegoat for the failures flanking their leadership n membership!
Some flaws the cult says women have-
-
Hegemony- Women want to marry men who are higher status. Meanwhile the cult teaches members that regardless of how ugly,broke,socially akward you are, if you have a dick,life owes you a woman and not just any woman but the highest Sexual Market Value woman on the market!
-
Women are liars, women are manipulative, and women have no the opposite of relative truth. Truth shifts depending on the circumstances and emotional objectivity. Ok! Now the cult teaches men that femal promiscuity has ruined society,ruined family values,ruined the world,ruined women,ruined men. Yet 3/4 of the skills men are taught in this cult is how to emotionaly blackmail and manipulate as many women as possible into having casual sex the more extreme and demeaning4the woman the better4the man’s ego, at the first opportunity available,as in as fast as,possible. So what is,more duplicitous than being drivers of sexual promiscuity yet at the same time demonizing it.
-
Women are naturally/inherently whores- Now surely, if sex is a basic right for men and according to the cult teachings men are innately polygamous.Its,unnatural for men to be monogamous. So who is the whore or the promiscuous gender. If members must read tons of material to learn how to dupe women into sexual promiscuity how then can women be innately promiscuous? If anything one section of red pill the MGTOW begun by homosexuals, rides on the ideology that male sexuality is so promiscuous its mismatched with female sexuality! Men need to bcm homosexuals so as to satiate their whore nature that comes most naturally to them. In NYC bath houses,gays have upto 30 different sex partners a,night. For a woman to have this high traffic of partners, she must be in full time sex work! On average gay men have 500 sex partners most of them casual. This isnt the case for lesbians. So surely you can see even the cult acknowledges that men are the naturally whorish gender.
These are just few of the lies peddled as gospel truths by tht cult targeting men who are bitter and who are failures! I could rebuff every single teaching of tht cult but they’re just too many n Im beginning work on my PhD thesis! A much better use of my time as anyone who can buy this,hogwash is already a,lost cause anyway.
You will get nothing, this is not the US
There’s no good idea they have. Its even better you go back to ttraditional African teachings for men than joining an anti family values homosexual cult called MGTOW. They just hide behind being anti female their real agenda is to promote homosexuality.
Ubaya ya kuargue na wewe ni moja. Ur very ignorant. U don’t know a damn thing but you’re still very vocal. Just Google the Kenyan cases uone the sucess rate of 50/50 award in high profile divorce cases b4 u jump to express your emotional unsubstantiated opinion as fact.
Na btw wacha iishie hapo, nimeona umeanza kuongea shoste
Mzee shida hapo. Georgina is v allergic to fectis that do not tie in with her threads, yet she starts them and expects contributions. Like now I am dying to ask her why she has even thought about how much she can gain after losing her husband but I won’t. One last thing feminism and equality are miles apart.
:D:D
She resulted to calling me ignorant and loud after I didn’t agree with what she was saying. Here is another excerpt from a divorce case in KENYA that proves my argument
“In considering a claim for maintenance, regard must be had to the provisions of Article 45(3) of the Constitution of Kenya which recognizes that “parties to a marriage are entitled to equal rights at the time of the marriage, during marriage, and at the dissolution of the marriage …it relates to and recognizes personal rights of each spouse to enjoy equal rights to property and personal freedoms and to receive equal treatment without discrimination on the basis of gender and without being shackled by repugnant cultural practices or social prejudices. Article 45(3) is in harmony with Article 21(3) of the Constitution which enshrines equality of men and women and specifically states that “women and men have the right to equal treatment…
…the age-old tradition in which men were deemed to be the sole bread winners and to carry the burden of maintaining their spouses does not hold true anymore …
Ask! Its called a contingency plan. Husbands are not God. They die,cheat and can leave at anytime. Only a fool has no contingent plans and bases 100% on a variable that’s out of their ctrl like a child or a,spouse. My parents took me to school and I think for myself about everything! Just ask my doctors. Watakushow am not a typical woman who is just a,passenger. Am the master of my fate, captain of my destiny! Not my reach husband ! Tho nampenda sana!
over ambitious career driven woman, applying calculus equations on your husbands property before you even divorce… I’d rather stick to ordinary hybrid kunguru than such kind of women
Pwegegege twendelee
[B]‘In light of Article 45(3), the criterion in determining the rights of spouses in a marriage must treat the husband and wife as equals and neither has a greater or lesser obligation than the other in relation to maintenance. In short, in cases where, as here, spouses have no children, a wife does not enjoy advantage over a husband or vice versa and the age-old tradition in which men were deemed to be the sole breadwinners and to carry the burdening of maintaining their spouses does not hold true anymore. Under the Constitution, the respondent has a duty to support and maintain herself no less than the petitioner has to support himself and there is no greater obligation on the part of the petitioner to support himself than there is on the part of the respondent to support herself. No spouse who is capable of earning should be allowed to shirk responsibility to support himself or herself or turn the other spouse into a beast of burden but where a spouse deserves to be paid maintenance in the event of divorce or separation the law must be enforced to ensure that a deserving spouse enjoys spousal support so as to maintain the standard of life he or she was used before separation or divorce. The financial capacity of the spouses has to be examined before the court makes a ruling as to whether a spouse should pay maintenance and if so how much.’
Wait for it…
[/B]
In view of what I have stated above concerning the effect of Article 45(3) of the Constitution on Section 25 of the Matrimonial Causes Act, and the evidence that has been placed before me concerning the circumstances of the parties hereto, I find that the summons dated 11th July 2012 is without merit. I hereby dismiss it. Each party shall bear their own costs.
Hata Nazlin Umar wanted a lot of money in her divorce settlement. I don’t know how that case was resolved.
[SIZE=6]Women judges agitate for equality in divorce[/SIZE]
This contradicts the popular belief that they are disadvantaged when property is distributed.
[I]https://www-nation-co-ke.cdn.ampproject.org/ii/w680/www.nation.co.ke/image/view/-/3963454/medRes/1666261/-/89yo2f/-/divorcepic.jpg
An image illustrating divorce. Participants at the International Association of Women Judges summit said courts in Uganda and Kenya usually shared property according to a spouse’s contribution. FILE PHOTO
https://www-nation-co-ke.cdn.ampproject.org/i/www.nation.co.ke/image/view/-/2019634/medRes/593420/-/n998ypz/-/No+photo.jpg
By COLLINS OMULO
https://www-nation-co-ke.cdn.ampproject.org/i/www.nation.co.ke/image/view/-/3158002/medRes/1301880/-/vt70yr/-/KAKAH.jpg
By MAUREEN KAKAH
IN SUMMARY
[ul]
[li][SIZE=3]Participants said courts in Uganda and Kenya usually shared property according to a spouse’s contribution.[/SIZE][/li][li][SIZE=3]Women judges at the Nairobi conference urged courts to use the rulings to bridge the gender gap and promote equality.[/SIZE][/li][/ul]
Women gain more in the event of divorce, contrary to popular belief that they get the short end of the stick, a judges’ summit has been told.
This was revealed during the 15th Africa conference of the International Association of Women Judges last month.
Participants said courts in Uganda and Kenya usually ordered that property be shared according to a spouse’s contribution.
ADVERTISEMENT
PROPERTY OWNERSHIP
Since the contribution is not necessarily monetary, women score better than their partners when child-care and household chores are taken into account.
It is four years since a ground-breaking divorce ruling that changed the law on property ownership in Uganda.
Before that, the country relied on laws that dated back to the pre-independence days.
EQUAL SHARE
The law was changed to provide for a fair distribution of jointly acquired property at the dissolution of a marriage or upon the death of a partner.
The outcome granted Ugandan women the power to seek and be granted divorce on an equal basis with men.
Contribution in marriage includes child-care and domestic chores.
In 2013, the court declared that in the event of divorce, a spouse can share property that was acquired either during the marriage or before if one proves she or he contributed to its acquisition or development.
CUSTOMARY MARRIAGE
But even more importantly, it put clearly that such contribution could be monetary or in kind.
The ruling, referred to as the Rwabinumi Decision, is now the law in Uganda.
It binds lower courts, which are required to follow it when deciding issues of distribution of property.
A third case that uplifted women in Uganda was a bride price refund matter in 2015.
It held that the demand for return of bride price before a customary marriage could be legally dissolved violated the right of women to equality and equal treatment.
CASE CONCLUDED
Until then, most communities demanded that bride price must be refunded to the man before such a marriage could be dissolved.
In Kenya, a case involving a couple that got married in 1961, had seven children and went their separate ways in 2001 prompted a in the law on sharing property after divorce.
The woman who first filed the case in the High Court wanted the property registered in her estranged husband’s name given to her.
She sued in 2004 but the case was concluded eight years later.
The woman was awarded some properties but the issue still landed in the Court of Appeal.
In March, three judges comprehensively defined the law on sharing matrimonial property.
GENDER GAP
Justices Phillip Waki, Patrick Kiage and Festus Azangalala ruled that it has to be done in line with each spouse’s contribution.
However, they pointed out that arriving at conclusions on distribution of property would ultimately depend on the circumstances of every case.
The matter is still the subject of another case in which the Federation of Women Lawyers (FIDA) is seeking the 50-50 rule to be upheld.
With the comparisons, women judges at the Nairobi conference urged courts to use the rulings to bridge the gender gap and promote equality.
POVERTY
The judges said it was only through such bold and enforceable judicial pronouncements that voices of women would be heard.
“We exercise our power not only through the decisions we render, but also through the process we follow in arriving at those decisions,” Justice Esther Kitimbo Kisaakye of the Supreme Court of Uganda said.
“Eradicating poverty, especially among women, will require us to reflect more on how to approach matters brought before us.”
It was also pointed out that in Africa, poverty has been given a female face not only because of the scenario where women lack income but also because of gender prejudice.
DEVELOPMENT GOALS
In Tanzania, a court ruled that the Haya customary law, which stipulated that females had no right to sell clan land, was contrary to international laws.
Justice Stella Ogene of the Court of Appeal in Delta State in Nigeria hailed the verdict.
She praised the Ugandan rulings, which set aside laws that prohibited cultures, customs or traditions that were against the dignity, welfare or interests of women.
Dr Kisaakye, who also doubles as the president of the National Association of Women Judges in Uganda, challenged her colleagues to use their positions to break the cycle of poverty in line with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals.
“Decisions of constitutional and supreme courts can have far-reaching implications beyond the parties that took the disputes to court,” Dr Kisaakye said.
MORE FROM NATION.CO.KE
[ul]
[li]Donald Trump A to Z, from America First to ‘Zero’[/li][li]Former lobbyists for Kenya entangled in Trump-Russia Probe[/li][li]31 sexual abuse cases filed against UN peacekeepers, staff[/li][li]American arrested over tweet ‘insulting’ Robert Mugabe[/li][li]US strikes Islamic State in Somalia for first time[/li][/ul]
This page might use cookies if your analytics vendor requires them. Accept[/I]
Every property Im aware of is in his name and mine. Not Mr. &Mrs! Its my name. His name. Every development n company’s has shares in my name. Cliff Ombeta is my personal lawyer on retainer so nobody can take me to the cleaners. He’s a shark like me. Am sure you’ve got nothing so Kuguru is best4u.
What is this? For someone who claims they want to do a phd, your research is BS. First this is an opinion piece, I want to see actual cases on alimony. I thought you said there are many examples on the net of 50/50 sharing and then this is what you’re coming up with? Bure
Anyway tuendelee…
“Parties to a marriage are entitled to equal rights at the time of the marriage, during the marriage and at the dissolution of the marriage.”
This constitutional provision emphasizes the equality between spouses. No one spouse has a right to be maintained by the other simply by virtue of his/her gender. The question that immediately comes to mind is what efforts if any is the respondent making to provide for her own upkeep. She is an able bodied woman and is perfectly capable of seeking some form of sustenance for herself. The purpose of maintenance is not to financially punish or cripple one party at the expense of the other. Nor is its purpose to make one spouse a human ATM machine. No spouse who is capable of earning a living ought to be allowed to shirk his/her responsibility to do exactly that.
Summary :
https://www.hapakenya.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/HK350long.png
Home People
[ul]
[li]People[/li][/ul]
[SIZE=6]How the Matrimonial Property Act can affect you in case you get divorced[/SIZE]
By
Vanessa Mwangi
March 21, 2017
https://www.hapakenya.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/download19.jpg
0SHARES
0
0
24
Historically, marriage had the specific purpose of perpetuating one’s lineage, and in the process bestowing social status on men. In the traditional setting people practiced customary law which encouraged polygamy and generally discouraged the owning property by women.
After independence Kenya adopted laws from Britain. The law on matrimonial property at the time, the English Married Women’s Property Act of 1882, encouraged a woman’s submission to her husband. Any personal property acquired by the wife during the marriage went automatically to the husband and there was no consideration for the woman’s contribution.
As such the drawing of the Matrimonial Property Bill brought with it a sense of hope, that things would change for the better and both married parties would get their voices equally heard by the law. Despite this, there have been concerns that the recently enacted Matrimonial Property Act is unconstitutional as it imposes conditions to enjoyment of property rights especially it’s sections 7 and 8, that take away property rights during marriage and bases them on divorce.
It was on the 12th November 2013 when the Matrimonial Property Bill was passed into law, with key amendments that would’ve greatly favored the ability for stay-at-home men or women by guaranteeing an equal share of assets during divorce. It stated that where there was no prenuptial agreement, “ownership of matrimonial property vests in the spouses in equal shares irrespective of the contribution of either spouse towards its acquisition, and shall be divided equally between the spouses if they divorce.” (Matrimonial Property Bill Sec 7)
However seeing how this would unjustly encourage gold diggers, and marriage-hopping brides and grooms, this provision was later amended to read that, upon divorce, spouses shall share property (not equally) on the basis of the contributions they make in its acquisition. (Matrimonial Property Act, Sec 7).
Previously, the term of ‘contribution’ was broad placing the burden of proof in favor of women. A woman was entitled to an equal share of property in divorce if she could prove that the property in question was acquired during the marriage and that she “contributed directly or indirectly” to its attainment. Today, ‘contribution’ amounts to monetary and non-monetary contribution and includes domestic work and management of the matrimonial home, child care, companionship, management of family business or property and farm work.
For this reason, Justice Patrick Kiage, while delivering a judgment in an appeal where a separated couple was fighting over property, said that once the marriage is over, each marriage partner should walk away with the share of what they contributed. The judge, claimed in his ruling that it was strange to think that partners can acquire 50 percent of each other’s wealth without analyzing individual contributions.
Although the Constitution recognizes equality between a man and a woman in marriage, it cannot guarantee 50-50 sharing of matrimonial property. Kiage said the Constitution was not a loophole for lazy partners to harvest benefits from their marriages without lifting a finger. “…It cannot be an avenue to early riches by men who would rather reap from rich women or women who see in monied men an adieu to poverty,” said the judge.
Furthermore the definition of ‘Matrimonial Property’ has changed overtime; ensuring one spouse can’t exploit the other. Initially, the term included any movable or immovable property owned by both spouses or either spouse and is acquired during the time of the marriage (Matrimonial Property Bill, Sec 6). It was then amended to only consist of movable and immovable property jointly owned by both spouses. In the case where one spouse owns immovable property in his/her own name as their personal property, then that concerned property would be out of reach of divorce settlements.
[B]Concurrently, where matrimonial property is acquired during marriage in both the spouses’ names, there shall be a presumption that their beneficial interests in the matrimonial property are equal, (Matrimonial Property Act, Sec 14). In this instance, each spouse will receive an equal share of property. If one spouse wishes to be awarded sole possession or a majority of the assets, they would have to establish a reason as to why the equal division standard shouldn’t be applied.
In the case of a polygamous marriage, matrimonial property acquired by the man and the first wife shall be shared equally by the man and the first wife only. If the property was acquired before the man married another wife. Matrimonial property acquired after the other wives are married shall be regarded as owned by the man and wives taking into account any contribution made by the man and each of the wives.[/B]
Why am I arguing with u huna bibi, huna Mali. all u have is that bat shit crazy movement.
Am not ur Google search machine case ziko Google enda ujitafutia. Usiongelee PhD yangu wen u don’t even have a Masters. Pelekee ignorance yako mbali na,Mimi. Bure ni wewe!