[SUBMITTED - 7/28/18] Mommy and Daddy Issues

[Frieden-und Freudenland]

As I said, I am changing the alimony issue into a child support issue, because the controversy here seems less tricky to tackle. But let's see.

Draft 2
[description]You and one of your brothers were preparing to buy a nice and expensive gift for your mom's birthday, but your plans were thwarted when your brother came to your office and broke down in tears. Aggrieved and embittered, he tells you that he is strapped for cash and cannot pay for the gift, since he has had to pay a hefty sum to his ex-wife for child support again.

[validity] divorce is legal

1. [option]"This is unfair!" wails your brother, hugging you and crying on your shoulder. "@@RANDOMFEMALEFIRSTNAME_1@@ already works and clearly earns more than I do. After all, she resides in a 3-bedroom villa in the countryside, while I am cooped up in a studio penthouse downtown @@CAPITAL@@. And yet I have to pay half my salary to her every month! I think justice demands that child support be only paid if the custodial parents are significantly poorer than their ex-spouses."

[effect]many people transfer their assets to bank accounts in Manamana before divorcing their spouses

2. [option]"This doesn't go far enough!" yells @@RANDOMNAME@@, your secretary, who got divorced 15 years ago and has been avowedly single ever since. "My ex has the sole custody of our children, and I wasn't even given visitation rights at the time, because of a minor manslaughter on my crime record. So for 15 years, I have had to pay child support for kids whose faces I didn't even see. What nonsense! Parents shouldn't be forced to pay child support unless they share the kids' custody!"

[effect]children of rich non-custodial parents are typically out of sight, out of mind, and out of money

3. [option]"You don't know what you're talking about!" grumbles @@RANDOMFEMALEFIRSTNAME_1@@ @@RANDOMLASTNAME@@, your brother's ex, bottle-feeding your niece while at the same time rocking the stroller of your slumbering nephew to and fro. "Caring for children incurs many expenses - food, diapers, toys, guitar classes, ballet lessons, desig- I mean, diaper bags, and what not! If couples make kids together, they should pay for them together as well, irrespective of their income differences."

[effect]child support loans with high interest rates are available in @@DEMONYM@@ banks for divorced parents

[description]You and your brother were preparing to buy a nice and expensive gift for your mother's birthday, but your joyful anticipation of the upcoming birthday party was quickly overshadowed when your brother came to your office and broke down in tears. Aggrieved and embittered, your brother tells you that he is strapped for cash and cannot pay for the gift, since he has had to pay a hefty sum to his ex-wife for child support again.

[validity] divorce is legal

1. [option]"This is unfair!" wails your brother, hugging you and crying on your shoulder. "@@RANDOMFEMALEFIRSTNAME_1@@ already works and clearly earns more than I do. After all, she resides in a 5-bathroom villa in the suburbs, while I am cooped up in a shabby studio penthouse downtown @@CAPITAL@@. And yet I have to pay half my salary to her for child support every month - as if she needed it! I think justice demands that child support be only paid if the parents who have the custody of the kids are significantly poorer than their ex-spouses."

[effect]many people suspiciously liquidate their assets and transfer them to their relatives' bank accounts before divorcing their spouses

2. [option]"This doesn't go far enough!" yells @@RANDOMNAME@@, your secretary, who got divorced 15 years ago and has been avowedly single ever since. "My ex has the sole custody of our children, and I wasn't even given visitation rights at the time, because of a minor manslaughter on my crime record. So for 15 years, I have had to pay child support for kids whose faces I haven't even seen. If I were to run into them on the street today, I wouldn't even recognize them! What nonsense! Parents shouldn't be forced to pay child support unless they share the kids' custody!"

[effect]children of rich non-custodial parents are typically out of sight, out of mind, and out of money

3. [option]"You don't know what you're talking about!" grumbles @@RANDOMFEMALEFIRSTNAME_1@@ @@RANDOMLASTNAME@@, your brother's ex, bottle-feeding your baby niece while at the same time rocking the stroller of your slumbering nephew to and fro. "Looking after children incurs many expenses - food, diapers, toys, guitar classes, ballet lessons, tutelage, desig- I mean, diaper bags, and what not! Listen to me, if couples make kids together, they should pay for them together as well, irrespective of their income differences. End of the discussion!"

[effect]parents of adoptive kids are denied child support upon divorce as their spouses claim to have had no part in the reproduction process

[Australian rePublic]

Option 1 assumes that real estate is cheaper downtown than in the suburbs, and taht's simply not true everywhere

[Frieden-und Freudenland]

Option 1 assumes that real estate is cheaper downtown than in the suburbs, and taht's simply not true everywhere

Maybe re-read it?

[Frieden-und Freudenland]

Bump?

[Baggieland]

Hi F&F, this is a good issue, well written and with each point clearly made, however, my immediate concern is that everything is a bit too long, the description, the options and especially the effects. Take the scissors to everything; make it more concise and to the point.

[Candlewhisper Archive]

Good premise.

Effect lines are a little long, especially the first and third ones. Generally too many "commas" and "ands" for a good effect line.

I also think the options themselves could be more efficient in transmitting the information / jokes they have.

[Candlewhisper Archive]

heh. Simultaneous posts with the same advice! heh.

[Baggieland]

heh. Simultaneous posts with the same advice! heh.

Great minds think alike. Or is it fools never differ?

[Frieden-und Freudenland]

Hi F&F, this is a good issue, well written and with each point clearly made, however, my immediate concern is that everything is a bit too long, the description, the options and especially the effects. Take the scissors to everything; make it more concise and to the point.

Good premise.

Effect lines are a little long, especially the first and third ones. Generally too many "commas" and "ands" for a good effect line.

I also think the options themselves could be more efficient in transmitting the information / jokes they have.

Many thanks to both of you

I tried to shorten the description and the options a bit - but this shortening was only about 0.5 lines or so I guess I'm not good at chopping away at long options.

But I did shorten the effect lines quite a bit (with the exception of the effect line for 2, where I really like the "out of sight, out of mind, out of money" joke - but should I get rid of it just to avoid having commas in an effect line?)

Also, does the effect line of Option 3 sound well? Because I don't know how often the word "pillage" is used as a noun.

[Trotterdam]

But I did shorten the effect lines quite a bit (with the exception of the effect line for 2, where I really like the "out of sight, out of mind, out of money" joke - but should I get rid of it just to avoid having commas in an effect line?)

I think the commas are okay, a short phrase like "out of mind" can't be confused for a verb phrase.

Also, does the effect line of Option 3 sound well? Because I don't know how often the word "pillage" is used as a noun.

I've never heard it used as a noun before (that I can remember), but according to my dictionary it can be.

[Candlewhisper Archive]

Correct, but archaic.

"pillaging" as the noun might be more appropriate here anyway, as pillaging is more clearly referring to the child-rearer engaging in the act of pillaging, whereas pillage could be there being pillage around the child, or pillage of the child.

Even better would be "plundered treasure", which then takes away the icky contexts of the word pillage (often being used in the phrase "rape and pillage") being used near the word "child". Plus "plundered treasure" sounds piratical, which always has some subconscious humour associations.

[Trotterdam]

"pillaging" as the noun might be more appropriate here anyway, as pillaging is more clearly referring to the child-rearer engaging in the act of pillaging, whereas pillage could be there being pillage around the child, or pillage of the child.

The current form was used because Frieden-und Freudenland was making a pun on the traditional phrase "it takes a village". You're right that the verb form would be preferable otherwise, but it would lose the pun.

[The Free Joy State]

I got the "it takes a pillage/village" pun. But I have to agree with CWA that having "pillage" near "child" -- due to historic associations -- could risk being squicky.

Overall, I think it's a great issue.

I do have to wonder if the portrayal of the brother in #1 is in-keeping with usual portrayals of "your brother", who's something of an amoral psychopath. I suggest substituting with another relative or perhaps adding the word "other" (to differentiate him from psycho-bro).

[Candlewhisper Archive]

Never heard that phrase, my bad. I definitely don't want to kill the joke.

[Frieden-und Freudenland]

I got the "it takes a pillage/village" pun. But I have to agree with CWA that having "pillage" near "child" -- due to historic associations -- could risk being squicky.

Overall, I think it's a great issue.

I do have to wonder if the portrayal of the brother in #1 is in-keeping with usual portrayals of "your brother", who's something of an amoral psychopath. I suggest substituting with another relative or perhaps adding the word "other" (to differentiate him from psycho-bro).

Never heard that phrase, my bad. I definitely don't want to kill the joke.

Alright, thank you. I changed the brother to "one of your brothers."

I also changed the effect line for 3.