186
Justin Trudeau and Sophie Grégoire Trudeau announce separation (www.cbc.ca)
submitted 3 years ago by to c/canada@lemmy.ca
43 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 6 points 3 years ago (1 child)

I heard rumors a few years ago that they were already separated. Weird that they're supposedly going on a family vacation right after announcing that they're separating.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 30 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    Not that weird. The kids are the priority, and they should be.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -2 points 3 years ago* (1 child)

    It is weird only in that if they are not going to socially separate, all this tells us is that they have decided to separate their assets. Is that worth announcing? Were we otherwise going to be alarmed if Sofie opened a new bank account in her own name?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 10 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    In Ontario, you have to be separated (defined as living apart) for a year before you can get a divorce. There are exceptions for abuse and adultery, but this is the first legal step on the road to divorce. Whenever possible, it's best to keep it as amicable as possible when children are involved. That can still include going on vacations together.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    In Ontario, you have to be separated (defined as living apart) for a year before you can get a divorce

    What the fuck? Actually? What's the reasoning there? That seems unusual to me.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 3 years ago* (1 child)

    Ontario family law is written around the idea that women are helpless. Nonsensical by today's standards, but in a historical context, where things like job options for women were limited to non-existent, it becomes a little more understandable.

    Given that, the idea is that a year of separation allows demonstration that a woman is able to separate from her husband. The state wants to ensure that she isn't going to be discarded to the streets where she will be left to be burden on society. If that test fails, she remains the "man's problem."

    Why are we in Ontario intent to hang on to such sexist views? Well, it's Ontario, land of conservatism. It took until the year 2000 for Toronto to finally give up being dry (in the prohibition sense)! We're the Arab state of the west.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    It took until the year 2000 for Toronto to finally give up being dry

    Uh, what?! Can you point me to some further reading on that? Ontario is far stranger than I thought.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago*

    Typically one will spell out the division of assets in a separation agreement. That can be done at any time. You can even write up such an agreement when you are at the peak of marital bliss if you really wanted, although it might be unusual.

    They seem to be happy to maintain a relationship, even if just for the kids, so there is no social division.

    Divorce doesn't really mean much – other than allowing you to get married again, I suppose. It's a pretty handwavvy concept to begin with.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent