|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Let's break down what exactly Juanita is going to steal from Michael through divorce and put it in more truthful terms.
-Custody of their three children.
She is going to tell them lies about their father and make them hate him, as well as suck more money for child support.
-Possession of their "marital residence."
She wants the large mansion that Michael paid for with his own money, and force him to move into a smaller house.
-An "equitable" share of their marital property.
She wants at least 50% of everything Michael owns, even if she has no right to claim it.
-A "fair and reasonable sum" for temporary and permanent maintenance.
She wants enough money to pay for the house, all her bills, expenses, for her to have at least $1,000 spending money every day, for the rest of her life. And maybe a little extra "just in case."
-Michael Jordan would be granted visitation rights with his children.
Michael Jordan could see his children once a month to give them expensive presents, while his own children hate him because of their mother's thoughts implanted inside their heads (see above for how this is accomplished).
Juanita is a greedy life-sucking woman who doesn't deserve a penny of Michael's hard-earned money. Michael Jordan is about to get royally screwed by this "woman," and if he doesn't bring a large jar of Vaseline to the courtroom, he will probably be bleeding out the asshole when he leaves it (I apologize for the strong terms used).
Just another horror story of the way men are treated in today's society. It sickens me to think that this is acceptable.
Michael Jordan has my sympathy.
"Stereotypes are devices that save a biased person the trouble of learning."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday January 09, @09:44AM EST (#2)
|
|
|
|
|
I know this is a crazy idea, but is there any way at all we could get this guy to join the men's movement. If I had hundreds of millions of dollars, and was about to see half of it disappear to a greedy ex-wife, I'd be happier donating large chunks of it to organizations which are fighting to help men have custody and reasonable divorce settlements than splitting it up with the b****.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday January 09, @10:45AM EST (#3)
|
|
|
|
|
and that's why you shouldn't get married.
She will steal everything from him, and it's legal.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interesting article. It definitely sheds a little light on their relationship.
Juanita has had an agenda from the beginning. Their relationship started when she slapped a paternity suit on Jordan, which he nullified by taking her to Vegas and marrying her. Now, that Michael is worth a heck of a lot more, she's decided that it's time to milk her "cash cow," which she's going to get away with, thanks to the legal system.
Not only that, but she hired an INVESTIGATOR to follow him around and dig up some dirt on him (who wants to wager that she paid the investigator with Michael's money???). Talk about pathetic! It would seem as though she's been planning this for years. This woman is dangerous and cruel, and I hope that she gets her just desserts in the end.
By the way, does anybody know of anything called a "maternal suit"? I, for one, haven't.
"Stereotypes are devices that save a biased person the trouble of learning."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The absurdity of divorce settlements can be reduced to the following question:
How can someone who does not contribute to the net woth of a marriage end up with more than the contributor once divorce takes place?
You need your beets -- you recycle, recycle!
Don't eat your beets -- recycle, recycle!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Michael has so much power in the sports arena. And even after the divorce, he will be well-to-do, so he has little to lose by joining the men's movement overtly. Contrast him to our friend Dirk Benedict. Dirk's career was on the rise. As an actor, he depended heavily on a community that is largely feminist for future employment. Michael is a superstar. Whenever he opens his mouth, there are people who will publish what he says, people in the mainstream press. If there was any way we or others could convince him to vocally join with us, or even passively agree to extend moral (not even financial) support, it would be pure gold to men everywhere in this country. His "enlistment" in this movement COULD be a dam-breaker. There could be a MAJOR shift in the comfort level that public figures currently have in speaking out against feminism.
If there's anyone reading here who has Michael's ear, please ask him to stop by. If he wants to check us out beforehand, he could join a chat under a pseudonym. If he likes what he sees, we'd be honored to have him.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This woman has a lot of nerve asking for all this. She deserves it why? For her years of hard work, ordering maids to wipe her ass? Is she wearing six championship rings? She probably didn't even care for the kids on her own. Screw her!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I never saw her butt running up and down the court earning the money. She is entitled to a large sum...but why:
1. Alimony
2. Child Support
3. Residence
4. Half of the Property
etc...
This is crazy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The only good thing about this case is that it is high profile. A lot of people will surely respond with anger (as we are) over the wife's demands. Perhaps it will shed some light on the need for reform in divorce laws.
You need your beets -- you recycle, recycle!
Don't eat your beets -- recycle, recycle!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday January 09, @10:11PM EST (#11)
|
|
|
|
|
I've never seen anyone angry about these things (except here).
Even if this is "high profile", people won't care.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Let's see, she wants the house, money, furniture,separate maintenance (of course), child support (more money) and the biggist prize: THE KIDS!
I guess she wants all of their "property"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Thursday January 10, @10:06AM EST (#14)
|
|
|
|
|
Last night I sopke with two African-American girls in a pharmacy near my home who had absolutely NO sypmathy for Mrs. Jordan. Their opinion was offered without much in the way of prompting, so I don't believe for a moment it was contrived; their manner led me to believe it was quite genuine.
The fact that Mrs. Jordan had Michael followed for four years by a PI is damning, aganst her. It's clear that whatever evindence she sought, she sought enough to publicly embarass him enough for him to pay anything to complete a settlement. I'm convinced that all she really wants is enough money to buy her silence, and the price for that will all too high. My advice to Michael, whatever his sins against his marriage, is take the public pain because the overwhelming public respect for you as a basketball superstar makes infidelity pale in comparison. This woman's scheming will become clear in the end, and SHE will be the one publicly embarassed.
FH
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
>I never saw her butt running up and down the court earning the money.
That would actually be pretty funny to see...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Friday January 11, @01:19PM EST (#19)
|
|
|
|
|
It amazes me how much wealth a woman can accumulate by doing nothing more than having sex. American Divorce law has turned American Women into the worlds highest paid whores. No wonder prostitution is outlawed, it would really cut into the marriage racket.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Thursday January 10, @03:43AM EST (#12)
|
|
|
|
|
I also have the nagging feeling that most people won't look at this and feel exceedingly bad for MJ. Even if the wifey takes 3/4 of his money, he'll still have a hundred million bucks left. How many of us would make that much in a 1000 years even if we got to keep all of our salary? I fear that is what most people will think. There's a real danger that he'd be labeled a rich spoiled whiner if he'd come out and speak his mind about divorce settlements. (I could just see some Katie Couric clone going "but the money goes to the upkeep of his CHILDREN...")
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That's the problem. These laws, while unfair to guys like MJ, don't hurt guys like MJ anywhere near as much as the average Joe Lunchbox earning only $35,000/year. Even after paying off his x, MJ will still have more money than he'll ever spend in his lifetime. A lot of Joe Lunchboxes may label him a whiner, too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think that, if MJ can expose his wife's conspiratorial nature sufficiently, then he will not be perceived as a whiner. Further, it is up to US to make sure that he has support, vocal support, because if he takes a risk, it will be on behalf of divorcing men. You're right, Claire, Joe Lunchbox may well still be screwed, but if Michael steps up, and we step up behind him, then Joe Lunchbox will be the better for it.
One part of this is custody. I don't think Michael will be perceived as a whiner for being vocal about joint physical custody. In fact, I think that's the one area where he would be very safe in speaking out, for two reasons: 1) there has been a lot of focus on the value of fathers of late and his voice will be one, albeit a very loud one, among many; 2) parenthood is a priceless commodity, and fathers, especially divorced fathers, can relate to him on that level. If he simply complains about the monetary cost, he's likely to have even less sympathy than Jesse Jackson.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joint physical custody is going to be very difficult in MJ's case. Do you know how often he must travel? If his kids are school-age, he can't just keep them out of school so they can go with him on road trips. He'll have to put them in boarding school (which defeats the entire purpose of any kind of custody) or leave them at one residence with a nanny. That's no different than their mother leaving them with a nanny.
I guess he could always hire private tutors to shuttle around with him and the kids, but that presents its own set of legal and other problems.
I don't know what the answer is regarding the kids, unless the physical custody is split in such a way that he has them when he is actually home.
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
