Physical semantics or legitimate complaint?
Seriously, a guy there petitioned the court to end his alimony payments to his ex-wife, because she had a sex change operation and is now a man. The court shot him down yesterday.
The plaintiff's argument was that he agreed to pay support to his ex wife, not the man she became.
I have mixed feelings. His ex-wife did not drop dead or anything. The person's still alive, just with a different set of tackle, and so that person should keep getting the ex-husband's check every month.
Buuuuuuut, I can't front. Call me closed-minded, but I sort of understand why the ex-husband is annoyed. He's paying spousal support to another man now. And, while he may not have any issues with anyone else's lifestyle as a general rule, he personally doesn't get down like that. So it bugs him.
On the other hand this could be about nothing more than the ex-husband wanting to get out of having to pay anymore. And he might have tried it even if his ex had remained a woman. Somehow I doubt it though, 'cause their original divorce agreement was pretty clear cut: he'd pay her until she died or remarried.
What do you think?
Oh, if you want to read a complete account of this story, here it is.