Author Topic: D-I-V-O-R-C-E  (Read 11289 times)

arborman

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2298
    • View Profile
    • http://bohemiancoast.blogspot.com
D-I-V-O-R-C-E
« Reply #30 on: July 06, 2007, 12:44:30 AM »
Quote from: fern hill
I'd really really like our BnR guys' take on this crap.


I'd love to, I really would.  But it was four races today (four!).  And we only lost the first two. :)  My hands are chapped, my neck is burnt, my body is utterly knackered.  And the spirit is apparently not willing.

Can I take a raincheck?  I promise to take on the morons another day.  Today is a holiday.
The pleasures of the table are for every man, of every land, and no matter what place in history or society; they can be a part of all his other pleasures, and they last the longest, to console him when he has outlived the rest.

Gigi

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2478
    • View Profile
D-I-V-O-R-C-E
« Reply #31 on: July 06, 2007, 12:59:22 AM »
Yesterday, I stumbled across something entitled "Rebuttals from Uranus".

Title was much better than the content.  Wasn't nearly vicious enough.

skdadl

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32874
    • View Profile
    • http://www.pogge.ca
D-I-V-O-R-C-E
« Reply #32 on: July 06, 2007, 05:37:56 AM »
You're right. She could be more vicious.

This is pretty funny, though:

Quote
Gray took the purse and asked if he could unzip it and look inside. She gave her permission and Gray was quick to point out that when you want something like this from a woman you always ask permission first. That shows respect!

So he proceeded to illustrate the way a woman talks: First she pulls out some tissues. Then a glass case. Then another small object. His point was this: a woman will not really know what it is she's talking about, so she has to pull out a lot of erroneous material while she's searching for what's really bugging her. Even though he pulled out some stuff, when he lifted up the bag it was still really heavy. That shows you that even though he pulled out a few things (i.e., "issues") she still had a lot of baggage in there that had to come out. And what's with all of the containers in this big purse? Well, containers are illustrative of the fact that women like to "protect" and "explore." This is the heart of the Venusian nature.

Men? They're easy, man. Men are wallets. Simple and compact, men get right to the point. Open up the wallet and there's the stuff. You reach in there and pull it right out! No wading through stuff that doesn't matter. Men just get right to the point.

Gray—in a rambling lecture quite characteristic of his Venusian communication model—digressed a bit to talk about his wife Bonnie.   Digging deeper into the purse Gray asked if he could open the owner's rather sizeable wallet. "Oh my," he said, "you have a lot of credit cards!" With that we were told that women like relationships, that's why they collect credit cards. (That and the fact that "women like shiny things.") Bonnie has a lot of credit cards. Even though Gray says he only uses his VISA and American Express for business purposes. And women love change. Bonnie loves change too. Women like shiny things and they love to hear change jiggling in their purses.

Great. Not only do I, as a woman, ramble, speak with no logical connection, and my testosterone level is going to surge when I'm 37. Now I'm a cat batting at shiny balls on the Christmas tree with a bell around my neck.

Another new thing Gray uses a lot are references to evolutionary psychology. He must be subscribing to Psychology Today. For instance, men and women have some sort of physiological differences in their eyes that set them apart from men. The eyes of men are able to pick up quick, rapid movements in small objects that are far away. Women, on the other hand, have eyes that enable them to use more of their peripheral vision. These physiological differences explain why men (hunters) like to watch television (small objects running on the screen at a distance) and women (gatherers) are able to multi-task without a second thought.


Quote
Directly after the lecture I headed upstairs for the book signing. The line wasn't all that long. I was fourth and very excited. After all, I sort of felt like Batman meeting the Joker!


 :lol:

RP.

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1224
    • View Profile
D-I-V-O-R-C-E
« Reply #33 on: July 06, 2007, 07:40:02 AM »
That's stupid, most men's wallets are full of junk papers, receipts, business cards, old lotto tickets.  Most even sit on that ungainly hunk of leather and paper all day long and wonder why they have back problems.  (I'm reformed now.  After my conversion, I wrapped an elastic band around my bills and kept them in my front pocket.)

skdadl

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32874
    • View Profile
    • http://www.pogge.ca
D-I-V-O-R-C-E
« Reply #34 on: July 06, 2007, 07:42:22 AM »
Quote from: RP.
(I'm reformed now.  After my conversion, I wrapped an elastic band around my bills and kept them in my front pocket.)


Ooh! An interesting bulge!   :lol:

Debra

  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11228
    • View Profile
    • April Reign
D-I-V-O-R-C-E
« Reply #35 on: July 06, 2007, 07:42:30 AM »
Is that money in your pocket or are you just happy to see me?  :groucho-marx:
“Damaged people are dangerous. They know they can survive.” —  Josephine Hart

skdadl

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32874
    • View Profile
    • http://www.pogge.ca
D-I-V-O-R-C-E
« Reply #36 on: July 06, 2007, 07:43:01 AM »
:rotfl:

GDKitty

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4232
    • View Profile
    • http://hopeandonions.blogspot.com
D-I-V-O-R-C-E
« Reply #37 on: July 06, 2007, 09:23:25 AM »
Quote from: RP.
That's stupid, most men's wallets are full of junk papers, receipts, business cards, old lotto tickets.  Most even sit on that ungainly hunk of leather and paper all day long and wonder why they have back problems.  (I'm reformed now.  After my conversion, I wrapped an elastic band around my bills and kept them in my front pocket.)

:lol: "Because important things come in a case! You've got a skull for your brain, a plastic sleeve for your comb, and a WALLET, for your money."

http://youtube.com/watch?v=aFFQZty8VX8

Toedancer

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13966
    • View Profile
Re: D-I-V-O-R-C-E
« Reply #38 on: January 21, 2009, 04:17:10 PM »
This case may go to the Supreme Court and will no doubt make men's heads explode (and I'm sure womenz too) because of the $$. But at the heart of it is Quebec's marriage and common-law laws.
Goldwater says it is a complete myth that in Quebec common-law rights are equal to married couples.

Quote
In all other provinces, couples who live in common-law relationships have the same obligations and responsibilities once they separate as those who are married. But in Quebec, only child support has to be paid, and, according to the woman's other lawyer, Anne-France Goldwater, it's the lowest in Canada.

Had the woman been legally married to the billionaire, she'd be able to lay claim to a large portion of what wealth accumulated during their time together. But since they weren't married, she's entitled to nothing.

She and Dubé, who expect the case to go all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada, want couples in de facto unions for three years without children or one year with children treated the same as people who are legally married.

http://www.globaltv.com/globaltv/quebec ... id=1199950
"Democracy is not the law of the majority, it's the protection of the minority." -Albert Camus 1913-1960

lagatta

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13093
    • View Profile
Re: D-I-V-O-R-C-E
« Reply #39 on: January 21, 2009, 04:25:37 PM »
Paging Wente. This sounds like a CONSTITUTIONAL issue.  :twisted:
" Eure \'Ordnung\' ist auf Sand gebaut. Die Revolution wird sich morgen schon \'rasselnd wieder in die Höhe richten\' und zu eurem Schrecken mit Posaunenklang verkünden: \'Ich war, ich bin, ich werde sein!\' "
Rosa Luxemburg

RP.

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1224
    • View Profile
Re: D-I-V-O-R-C-E
« Reply #40 on: January 21, 2009, 04:37:56 PM »
Quote
In all other provinces, couples who live in common-law relationships have the same obligations and responsibilities once they separate as those who are married.

This is news to me.

skdadl

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32874
    • View Profile
    • http://www.pogge.ca
Re: D-I-V-O-R-C-E
« Reply #41 on: January 21, 2009, 04:45:16 PM »
It's a shame that a case like this becomes the test case of an important principle, since public sympathy -- and perhaps even the sympathy of judges (although they're not supposed to have any) -- will be tried by anyone going for so much money.

In the rest of the country, the test case in the 1970s/1980s (and I'm not having any luck googling for the name of the couple -- anyone?) was much more clear cut. A farm wife who had worked for decades both to raise the couple's family and to help to run the farm faced destitution when her husband decided to divorce her, because he could claim that all the investment put into their farm and the income derived from it was his. That was just too obvious a problem to ignore, and from that case, revised law followed (I think 1985?). So did a lot of consciousness raising. The problem still exists for most women, and most women still need the protection of the law.

deBeauxOs

  • Guest
Re: D-I-V-O-R-C-E
« Reply #42 on: January 21, 2009, 05:11:44 PM »
Perhaps 'public sympathy' is moot, since the legal challenge is being financed by a very, very wealthy man.  
Quote
The high-profile entrepreneur, art collector and philanthropist has tussled with - and won against - the giants of the international auction business, Sotheby's and Christies, over price- fixing.

He was awarded a handsome monetary settlement in 2002 from a prestigious London trading house in a case related to the brokerage's improper transactions in copper futures trading.

Now Mr. Black, 64, is taking a stand on an another front altogether. He's bankrolling a Montreal woman's court fight to obtain alimony from her multimillionaire former partner.
 
Mr. Black says he knew the woman. ... "What I'm concerned about is the big picture and the law in Quebec," he said in an interview yesterday.

"Whoever, whether it's the woman or the man, is the weaker one in a common-law union in Quebec gets shafted," he said.

He vowed to finance the woman's battle all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada if need be.

Toedancer

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13966
    • View Profile
Re: D-I-V-O-R-C-E
« Reply #43 on: January 21, 2009, 07:22:55 PM »
A friend of mine wants to know if it will be retro? Well prolly not, but he remains as an executive at a big TO bank and he hates his job, stays for the money he must dish out because of Quebec's matri laws. He's desperate to go to Spain and be with fambly and hobbies. I believe he must continue paying til 65, eek!

Mr. Black, hmm somehow that's going to figure in the vitriol to come.

eta - there was no pre-nup, but apparently even that would not have helped.
"Democracy is not the law of the majority, it's the protection of the minority." -Albert Camus 1913-1960

deBeauxOs

  • Guest
Re: D-I-V-O-R-C-E
« Reply #44 on: January 21, 2009, 08:25:06 PM »
First of all, I don't see how a ruling favourable to the Québecoise in this particular case (not legally married to her common-law spouse) could automatically apply to other couples who were legally married and divorced and already have settlements.  

As for those who weren't married and split up: wouldn't lawyers have to prepare and present new requests before the courts and only if such new ruling might possibly apply to their case?  

How would this help your friend if he's already paying support?

 

Return To TAT