Go Back   Movie Fan Central Discussion Forums > Movie Talk! > Celeb Talk/Gossip
MOVIE FAN CENTRAL FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old 01-17-2012, 01:31 PM
Well, he makes an absurd amount of money. He will be fine and she will be fine and squabbling over dollars is, in this case, 'just' a squabbling. The principle of the thing only goes so far. California's divorce laws are lousy and they are still readjusting out of a bygone era- both a time when men were the breadwinners and a later time when equal rights aggressively institutionalized a few exaggerations here and there in favor of balancing the scales, but if anybody's looking at this with a working man's perspective that's the wrong perspective. Most people have probably bumped into that poor sap who was working three jobs just to cover an entitled sum of divorce of child care, and I myself on my own individually just listened to dave foley's story, which is an even worse case of asinine conventions in court and out of court, and how those can ruin a man's life (in this case, commonly a man's a rarely a woman's). But mel gibson can take the blow.

We should try not to insult anybody on offended principles alone, so it's cool to see god of war refocusing to insult the offended legal principle itself, and not the woman who ended up reaping the benefits of it. What he really meant to say was that california's divorce laws are a bitch. Dirty, filthy divorce laws. You like fucking people over, don't you law bitch. Yeah you do. With your whore mouth. Dirty whore mouth!
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 01-17-2012, 08:40 PM
Well if the laws of devoice is that bad in America maybe it might be better to not get married

But on me saying this isnt there laws regarding defacto relationships

You see why l agree to Mel giving half of his money over is because he earns quite alot and by giving over as much as he has wouldnt effect him

It would only effect him if he keeps on getting married to money grabbing women and that is where he would end up going bankrupt

But when you look at the oprdanary man getting devioced it can nearly shatter them if they have children to cater for

That can be a huge expence
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 01-17-2012, 08:53 PM
I agree with Bondgirl that it's better not to get married at all.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 01-18-2012, 05:10 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveyJoeG View Post
I agree with Bondgirl that it's better not to get married at all.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 01-18-2012, 07:26 AM
So I was watching Edge of Darkness a couple days back and was surprised that the lady at the heart of Gibson's affair and baby pre-divorce was a singer on a track he cowrote with her. Curious.

As for the whole divorce spat, I think back to Michael Jordan and Tiger Woods and their settlements. For Jordan at the time that settlement was $168 million, the largest ever for an athlete, until Woods' settlement to someone he just married was well over a quarter billion (da f***?!). While cheating was grounds for divorce in all those marriages who are we to say to say who's entitled to what? While I feel the marriages that lasted over 15 years were worth a lot more than one less than 5, I can't make judgement and ultimately while many settlements are indeed anti-male understand that certain tools like a prenuptial agreement were put in place to avoid being "taken to the cleaners." If one doesn't take this precaution in today's world then shame on you.

My feeling is if you have the wondering eye don't get married. If you are easily annoyed or feel trapped by your spouse don't get married. It's actually because of this I somewhat respect the likes of a Clooney not getting married, he has more to lose than to gain.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 01-18-2012, 08:17 PM
Well that is what l was saying if you are going to get married make sure this is what you want

Mel and Robyn were married along time and l do agree that marriage can be boring at times and you want to branch out and find something new and exciting sometimes this can work out for the best but sometimes you can be caught out

I think there is alot of marriges which last a long time and couples get bored with each other that is when couples need to talk to each other than go separate ways

These days it is too easy to run away from things

Also marrige shouldnt be about how much you have it is about to people who like being with each other

What l am saying is that money loads of it can wreak a marrige if one is not careful
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 01-19-2012, 05:05 PM
Sorry I can understand her getting 50% of what he has made during the marriage. She was with him from the bottom, so it's only fair.

The part I have a problem with is the 50% of future earnings. How does that work? Is this the most expensive alimony plan ever? I don't condone anything that the man has done in the past, but to take half of what he earns after the divorce is wrong. Two wrongs don't make a right, and this is fucking bullshite in my opinion.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 01-19-2012, 08:47 PM
Well maybe Mel should have thought about this before he walked out on Robyn..

Like you said she was with him when he was a no body and when he made it big he shared his wealth with her

I remeber seeing mel and his wife in Wodonga quite a few years back and they were happy and they owned a massive farm even that would be gone now because they went there sepaate ways

I think there is a lesson learnt here on how people act when they get together and the things that happen when things dont work out
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 01-20-2012, 03:07 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bondgirl View Post
Well maybe Mel should have thought about this before he walked out on Robyn..

So it's okay because he's an asshole?
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 01-20-2012, 05:00 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heisenberg View Post
Sorry I can understand her getting 50% of what he has made during the marriage. She was with him from the bottom, so it's only fair.

The part I have a problem with is the 50% of future earnings. How does that work? Is this the most expensive alimony plan ever? I don't condone anything that the man has done in the past, but to take half of what he earns after the divorce is wrong. Two wrongs don't make a right, and this is fucking bullshite in my opinion.
This is exactly my point from the get go. I am glad that I am not the only one who sees this. And yes, it's absolute shite.
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 01-20-2012, 07:06 PM
I 'think' it was a misreporting. She is entitled only to the future earnings of current income; meaning, however current incomes continue earning, she gets half those earnings. But if Gibson makes a new movie called Jewish Braveheart and it makes two hundred million dollars, she doesn't get anything. She is entitled to his current earnings and all future earnings of those current earnings (including but not limited to residuals from Passion, Apocalypto, and so on).
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 01-20-2012, 07:40 PM
All l am saying is that alot of men walk into marriage with there eyes shut

They dont realize that you have to work on things to make things right it is easy to run away from things

He lost half of his money because he wanted to have fun with other women and he wanted to get drunk without being hassled about it

Alot of men do not like being told what to do by there wifes

iSo in my opinion and l say it again she deseaved everything she got

I hope he thinks about what he lost because l can tell you she will never take him back if she ever does he will have to go by her rules meaning that he gets off the booze and acts like a mature man

Since he made in big in America he has always come across as a jerk
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 01-20-2012, 09:03 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shinigami View Post
This is a backhanded defense of the guy, but pinpointing tells in language (cunt whore cow bitch) only works if the person has a varied vocabulary, since the insinuation is that certain words are being picked from a wide range of possible words. A lot of the posters who tend towards this stuff don't really show much variation to begin with when they're posting on the gossip forums. They can have a wide vocabulary in real life, and that's the best I can do without condescending to anybody- I'm not meaning it that way, but sure, a lot of posters who make these repetitions of whore or bitch or dick sucking lips or motorboating or I would tap that or whatever, tend to have the same mannerisms everywhere on the boards. People aren't always picking and choosing their words. They're often just echoing. Although it might be good fodder for arguing a larger misogyny in the culture, there are lots of people for whom the first word come to mind when a woman does something unpleasant is 'bitch', while the first word that comes to mind when a man is doing the equivalent is an inequivalence of a less strong 'dickhead' or 'asshole' or something- even if the person doesn't have any stronger feelings towards one or the other, their language naturally shows more avarice towards the female just because the person isn't putting a lot of thought into it and 'echoing' unfortunately means reflecting some institutional prejudices the person might be unaware of.

Maybe that's why the gossip forum tends to get this stuff so often. We are a forum of movie fans, so maybe we post with a lot of thought when talking about movies but get thoughtless in these less important gossipy matters. Maybe that's why, uh. The...

...

...get it, because mister fantastic is always 'stretching'. Ha. Ah. Ehhh.

I appreciate your commitment to the middle ground and general benefit of the doubt you charitably afford to all, but I don't necessarily think that ignorance or lack of thought going into that ugliness works as an excuse for it. I think it's fair to say it is indicative of a misogynist culture, but I think the only way to improve that is to nip it in the bud and that letting it go when it's this egregious is a sign of tacit approval or at least acceptance that I'm not comfortable with.

We make clear we don't put up with racist, homophobic, or sexist crap and as a touchy P.C. liberal, I find it my duty to call people out on that crap.

Quote:
Originally Posted by God of War View Post
Robyn Moore is NOT entitled to 50% of all of Mel Gibson's future earnings as far as I am concerned. It's NOT her money. That's as simple and plain as I can put it.
I agree completely. I think if she got 50% of his past earnings while they were together, she deserves 0% of his future earnings. Though as Shinigami points out, it's not really "future earnings" in the galling sense, that's misleading.

I never disagreed with you on the substance of that point, but were you were attacking - rather viciously - the wrong target. If what you say is your problem is your problem, then your beef is with California divorce laws not a woman who did nothing wrong here and has given no cause to be degraded as a bitch, cunt, whore, cow, etc.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shinigami View Post
Well, he makes an absurd amount of money. He will be fine and she will be fine and squabbling over dollars is, in this case, 'just' a squabbling. The principle of the thing only goes so far. California's divorce laws are lousy and they are still readjusting out of a bygone era- both a time when men were the breadwinners and a later time when equal rights aggressively institutionalized a few exaggerations here and there in favor of balancing the scales, but if anybody's looking at this with a working man's perspective that's the wrong perspective. Most people have probably bumped into that poor sap who was working three jobs just to cover an entitled sum of divorce of child care, and I myself on my own individually just listened to dave foley's story, which is an even worse case of asinine conventions in court and out of court, and how those can ruin a man's life (in this case, commonly a man's a rarely a woman's). But mel gibson can take the blow.

We should try not to insult anybody on offended principles alone, so it's cool to see god of war refocusing to insult the offended legal principle itself, and not the woman who ended up reaping the benefits of it. What he really meant to say was that california's divorce laws are a bitch. Dirty, filthy divorce laws. You like fucking people over, don't you law bitch. Yeah you do. With your whore mouth. Dirty whore mouth!
Indeed.

Last edited by QUENTIN; 01-20-2012 at 09:37 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 01-21-2012, 06:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shinigami View Post
I 'think' it was a misreporting. She is entitled only to the future earnings of current income; meaning, however current incomes continue earning, she gets half those earnings. But if Gibson makes a new movie called Jewish Braveheart and it makes two hundred million dollars, she doesn't get anything. She is entitled to his current earnings and all future earnings of those current earnings (including but not limited to residuals from Passion, Apocalypto, and so on).
Thank you. That has made it so much easier for me to understand. So, in essence, one could say that 'royalties' from Mel's work during their marriage are what she is still entitled to in the future? If I had understood that from the very beginning, Their would have been absolutely no drama from my end, guyz. Sorry about that, everyone.
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 01-21-2012, 06:20 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by QUENTIN View Post
I agree completely. I think if she got 50% of his past earnings while they were together, she deserves 0% of his future earnings. Though as Shinigami points out, it's not really "future earnings" in the galling sense, that's misleading.
Now I understand. Yes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by QUENTIN View Post
I never disagreed with you on the substance of that point, but were you were attacking - rather viciously - the wrong target. If what you say is your problem is your problem, then your beef is with California divorce laws not a woman who did nothing wrong here and has given no cause to be degraded as a bitch, cunt, whore, cow, etc.
Gotchya. Once again. Many thanks to those who helped clear this up for me.

I am satisfied
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump