So, a friend of mine just caught up on the show last night, and he pointed something out to me and another friend of ours: shouldn't Mr. Peanutbutter be paying alimony to Diane? And if so, why is Diane still living in a shithole? 

Now, it was made very clear in this debate that none of us really knew what we were talking about (none of us had been married before, much less divorced), and there's only so much you can learn about California divorce laws from a few quick google searches. But, based on my minimal understanding of California law that I have gained thanks to said google searches, it does appear that PB should be paying alimony to Diane and that she shouldn't have to live in such a crappy apartment. 

At the time I jokingly said something like "season 6 prediction: Diane sues Mr. Peanutbutter for not paying alimony," but now the more time passes the more I'm really thinking about why Diane is living where she's living if it's true that PB should still be financially supporting her, even partially.

One theory I had is that maybe PB is paying alimony, but housing in LA is so expensive that Diane's still limited to a crappy apartment even with his money. But Anthony (the friend who got caught up last night) said that, based on his understanding of the concept, the point of alimony is so that the divorced partner can still maintain the same standard of living they had when they were married, at least temporarily, so that they don't suddenly get dumped into poverty or whatever. And if that's true, then, even with LA housing being expensive, Diane's apartment shouldn't have been quite so severe of a downgrade from where she was previously living, especially with how rich Peanutbutter is.

Another factor worth mentioning is the fact that, early in the season, Diane said something along the lines of "it's what I can afford and it makes me feel good to do it on my own," suggesting that she had a strong desire to not be financially dependent on PB and to pay for her own housing, even if that meant living in a crappy apartment. But then it quickly became obvious that she kind of hated living there and would definitely have tried to move into a nicer place if she had the ability to do so. And if she had the option of using PB's money to move someplace nicer, then, why didn't she?

Also, Mr. Peanutbutter seems like a generous enough guy that he gladly would've given Diane the money for a better apartment even if he wasn't legally required to do so. Although if he did offer her money, it's understandable why she might have refused his help, wanting to be financially independent and all. But, the whole thing that started this debate is that we're pretty sure he is legally required to give her money, so this probably isn't a case of Peanutbutter offering money out of the goodness of his own heart.

Now, obviously, neither myself or my two friends are lawyers, or California residents for that matter. And law is not an easy topic to learn and understand overnight. So, if anyone here is more knowledgeable on the topic of divorce laws, maybe you could shed some light on the situation? This mystery is honestly starting to bug me. XD

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.