In divorce, separation, or dissolution of a common law marriage, the woman will be the one to retain property of the house or apartment acquired with a government funded program "My House, My Life" that gives millions of low income citizens their first and only real estate property.
She did not determine how to discriminate in same sex Gay and Lesbian stable relationships, which are legal in Brazil.
President Dilma Rousseff will announce later, on public television, changes in the program "My house, my life" that will benefit women
The name "My house, my life" shows the extreme importance of a first hard earned house. And this will automatically go to the woman! Even in the case of a simple "stable relationship" with no marriage, no children. Even if there is a pre-nup contract determining separation of property. Even if the relationship was short, even if the man exclusively paid for the house. There goes his dream in the name of equality for women
In the case of separation, divorce, or undoing of a stable long term relationship, the ownership title of the real estate acquired through "My House, My Life" will be given to the women, or transferred to her regardless of the marital property regime.
The new rule applies to families with income range of up to three minimum wages that hat 95% of the value of the property financed by the program. […]
In cases where child custody is assigned exclusively to the husband or male partner, the title of ownership of the property will be registered in his name.
Only in such rare and exceptional cases the property will be signed to the man.. If the couple has no children the woman automatically inherits the real estate, the one and only first house they had. No chance for a man. And if they have children, rarely the man gets the sole custody.
The new rules are part of an interim measure that will be published today in the Official Government Legal Publication. Dilma President Blog Estadão
This is an official government decree. This is a present of the woman president of Brazil to her fellow women, in commemoration of the International Women’s Day. Dilma Rousseff declared. We wonder what comparably large present men will gain for the international men’s day.
I am proud to be leader of a government that has the most programs in our history to support women. But I know that government and society must do much more to fully value women […] The fight to value the women is an important task for all Brazilians Tribuna do Norte
This housing program is very significant and involves millions of houses and apartments.
Brazil’s housing plan, Minha Casa, Minha Vida (My Home, My Life) is entering its second phase, and aims to build 2,000,000 homes before 2014 for low income families. “Launching this new phase marks a special moment,” President Dilma Rousseff said. “Building a house is much more than construction work. It is building a dream because a home is the space where relationships are built, children are raised and family ties are established. (A home is) shelter, protection and security” Brazilian Times (English)
Too bad that shelter, protection, and security are only for women, not for men.
Only the lawyer association shyly protested, based not in defense of male equality, but on legal formalities
The Attorney General of the Association of Lawyers of Brazil (OAB), Ronaldo Cramer is concerned as the government decided to change the rules of the program My House, My Life – to ensure that in cases of separation, divorce or dissolution of stable union, the woman retains the property of a house built through the housing program. He understands that the official decree is an "unwarranted invasion" in the legislation that deals with the dissolution of couples’ Unions, dealt with in the Civil Code. 2
Pune men may have to rethink on property purchase
Automatic transfer of half the property is bad enough. Now imagine the poor Brazilian man where 100% of his first house goes to the woman.
As the central government has proposed an amendment of giving up to 50% share to wife in her husband’s property, men whose marriage is caught in a rough weather and on the verge of a divorce, will have to think twice before buying any immovable property.
Speaking to media persons here on Thursday, president of MRA Atit Rajpara said,“If a man has dependent parents and owns a single property and if 50% of that goes to wife post divorce, how will the husband take care of his old parents?.’’
The MRA has demanded that marriages and divorces should not be made to work like a property transfer bureau and the duration of marriage must be a crucial factor for consideration. The difference between a two-month marriage and a 20-year marriage must be clearly understood.
I hope BRazilian men all line up and assasinate that little c.nt and hang her up by her c.nt lips from the Jesus statue above Rio… who the fuck does she think she is ? Assasinate her in a public stoning with her c.nt exposed to the air..
We should not approve such violent hate speech and can not support violent action. But feminist policy has grave consequences that can destroy men’s lives. Or in this case, take away the first and only house he worked for all his life. And the individual man has no chance to counter-act this and to save his life’s work (a house) or even is future salary. What is left is either giving up his life (See Thomas Ball suicide) or blind rage as in this article.
It would be good if feminist injustice against men gets reversed and stopped, before too many men get into furious rage.
It is amazing: millions of men get their lives ruined by feminist laws who take away their property, income, children, and freedom. Also their sexual freedom, boy’s education etc. And there is not a STRONG political movement to call attention to the injustice, to turn things around. And to stop such laws right in the beginning. This would be the correct way to act. Millions of men clamoring for justice the legal way, not a few men becoming terrorists.
So after long consideration I allowed this comment to be published. With my analysis, and lightly censoring a swear word ………
This discriminatory practice, to take all property away from the man has been routine in the state of São Paulo for the last 12 years, this author claims. P
retty strange because it does not seem that state law can prescribe such discrimination in Brazil.
He says it is not just but justified because usually the children stay with the mother. Typical feminist excuse that ignores the fact that the decree is not restricted to families with children. Or to children fathered by the confiscation victim male.
Interesting also that by Brazilian law the only home can never be taken away, even from debtors. Only by ex-girl friends.
Even in Florida, likely murderer O J Simpson can hold on to a million dollar mansion for it being his only home.
The house’s title is routinely given in name of the woman, a commentator says. So matriarchy has already won in Brazil.
But in that case, at least the man has an option to protest, to not pay. He can see it coming! Now a later girl friend taking it away after it was his, with no warning. That makes things worse. And we wonder if he is obliged to continue paying for another 20 years, while she already took it away?
This is a good example why it was a huge mistake for men to believe women when they said they wanted ‘equality’. Most women are incapable of being fair. It was a disaster to think that women could be equal with men. They cannot divorce themselves from their emotions. To them, having a man slave away for them is ‘equality’ because they value themselves so much higher than men.
What a cunt.