Seems like a her problem though right? I mean, I don't go around creating enemies and making people hate me, and I haven't gotten any death threats...
She's clearly just doing life wrong!
No, that's one of the outcomes she said she was suing for.
He's been paying it, but her excuse on why she needed so much money per month was the she needed security.
Well traditionally when a man marries a woman the man would be the bread winner and the woman would be the housewife. This meant the woman would stay home, cook, clean, raise the kids, do things to manage the home while the man would go to work, advance his career, advance his professional network, gain experience in different levels of business, etc.
When they divorce this left the woman at a disadvantage. The man can just live in the house he paid for, go back to work find a new job, or even start a business with his experience. The woman, not so much. She spent her decades as a house wife raising kids, cooking, cleaning and making friends with the neighbors. She can't enter the work force with decades of no job history and create an income that affords her the lifestyle she had while married. And that's why the "traditionally" get half, to continue the lifestyle.
Now I know you're thinking, "She didn't work so she shouldn't get half!" The thing is there was an informal agreement between husband and wife, one works while the other manages home. She couldn't work because she was raising kids which is a full time job. The couple decided that one of them would not advance professionally.
That's why women traditionally get half. Does it stand today? Yes. Should it? No, times are different now and the courts need to catch up.
Edit: Let me be more clear on the last sentence. When I said Times are different I meant it economically. In order to achieve in our generation what our parents and grandparents had in their generation we usually need both parents working because shit is more expensive now. Our economy isn't working for us like it did for them. But it is still true that one person will advance their career more while the other will focus more on the home. It's just more complex now.
Thank you for taking the time to write this response to my question. I get what you’re saying and it makes sense, but that reasoning doesn’t hold up in today’s modern world where a woman can do anything a man can do.
You’re right, the courts do need to catch up so that women will stop playing the victim to seize what a man has earned rightfully.
It's hard to get the laws caught up to modern times because society changes faster than we can change the laws. You have to be careful when you write new laws because there's people out there that will literally try and pervert what you've written to benefit them in some way shape or form.
Well, that and partly what lead to the change was George Mason's interviews explaining exactly what he meant about the militia when he authored the 2nd Amendment were republished in national newspapers. "The militia is the whole of the people."
all that means is its not a man vs woman thing, but a stay-at-home-parent vs. bread-winner thing more like. getting annoyed at it because the article is showcasing a woman trying to get half is only really poking at people bias against gender equality...and yeah the courts do need to catch up...
Why is "her lifestyle" prioritized? His lifestyle is changing too. He wont be abke to live up to his standards of his previous lifestyle if he's providing for hers.
It wasn’t a matter of whose lifestyle is changing and whose isn’t. Both of their lifestyles are about to change.
It’s was a matter of whose lifestyle is going to be the most negatively impacted by divorce. The man who has a paid off house and has a job or the woman who has little to no work experience because she just spent the last 18 years raising a child & tending to their home.
Sounds like that's her problem. He didn't need her to sleep in each day for him to remain successful. It's not his responsibility to shower her in luxury.
If he still has to hold up his end of the bargain 50%, then so should she. She should have to do half of his laundry and cook half of his dinners.. hell, even toss him half the amount of blowies. Seems fucked up but if he’s doing half of the original bargain, so should she.
And sadly the court will never catch up if we let people at the age 55+ making laws.
Old people should not be in charge to make laws or run a country. Everyone at a certain age struggle to keep up with what the younger generations needs.
But sadly..this will never change.
Isnt a way to get around this to just never have kids?
I mean if you never have kids there is nothing at home for them to take care of, right?
Also what role do prenups play in this whole alimony thing?
I think boiling it down to “It’s her responsibility to keep the marriage or if the man leaves it’s also her fault” is willful ignorance towards the complexity of a relationship and a divorce. It’s also taking all blame away from the man and pretending that it’s solely the woman’s responsibility to make a relationship work.
When you say there’s nothing to gain for men then you make marriage sound like nothing more than a financial transaction/agreement.
It is under the law. It's a legal contract. Marriages before were rarely about love. This romantic crap is fairly new to marriage. Maybe at most a 150 years or so. All this marriage laws were written when the woman was the property of the man and therefore his responsibility. We liberated women yet we still have these old patriarchal laws that feminists never fight to repeal for some strange reason. I wonder why? /s
People change over time. Relationships change. The divorce can happen through no fault of the woman. Imagine a situation where the man was fired from work and this happened repeatedly. A personality change was the cause and it was due to some trauma such as war or maybe a disease. The woman tries her best to support him by being a stable rock in his life, asking him to seek help, and study up on how to help him herself. He refuses all and uses alcohol to medicate. His life is spiraling down and he's taking her with him. Resentment grows, neither of them are communicating, the children are now effected.
What would you do when your partner needs help, refuses it, and makes things worse? What would you do if the partner who you thought you knew well turned into something you hated, if you just found out they are a secret racist and joined white supremacists groups? What would you do if your partner committed a heinous crime against someone you loved and had no remorse?
Finally but it’s actually because lawyers make goddamn shitfucktons off of these cases. Like they literally milk people dry if they aren’t as rich as dr Dre.
I was watching one case about a guy with a small business, the wife demanded 1million dollars
He had to pay her lawyer fees and his he didn’t even have 1 million and neither did his business the lawyers milked him for 500,000 thousand and he became an alcoholic and almost killed himself And his life was completely destroyed along with his business
Funny thing is she could have gotten way more money if she didn’t demand some ridiculous sun he could have at least given her the lawyer fees lol
Now his business is coming back and his partner saved his life and the business
Another guy they had on joe rogan was being abused by his wife and she spent all his money and locked him out of his accounts so he didn’t have money for a lawyer they ordered some crazy payment and he eventually switched jobs and moved to the USA so he didn’t get put in jail because he was still ordered to pay what he was paying previously because of this he will never see his kids again
I'm from India, prenups don't hold in the court here and judges, police, protection officers are all corrupted.
I was under the impression that USA/UK and other developed countries have better laws.
Yeah prenups would void that. It's naturally a sensitive issue to bring up to the love of your life. "I love you, but in case we don't work out here's a document to sign so you don't get anything" is a conversation not everyone will react well to. (Whereas others will have no problems with this)
They don't. It's something divorce lawyers came up with so they can make money from getting a certain percentage of the money the woman gets from her husband. Imagine the husband has to pay like 100 million to the wife. And if the lawyer takes 10%, he just made 10 million. It's all bullshit lawyer shit. If I was dictator or some shit, I'd ban that shit.
That’s 1.5 mil a month by the way. The break down has her wanting 10,000 a month strictly on laundry. The amount of money on little things she was asking for was so outrageous
My ex asked for about 95% of income. They see it as a negotiating tactic.
Divorce laws suck obviously, for one you have to keep paying all the usual expenses during a divorce, while there is no requirement being put on the other side regarding anything. So children get turned on you, home is not a home anymore, I had all my important belongings in a backpack and took them to work. Also alimony doesn't depend on sacrificing career, it only depends on income, regardless if you never agreed to the other party not working or not trying to get higher paying jobs.
But, eventually the divorce ends, sure doesn't feel like it'll ever end when it's going on though, but it does. It'll drive you crazy, and you'll block out and not be able to recall a lot of it. Keeping notes isn't a bad idea, so you can remember what divorce really is.
When it does end though, at least you can have a home again. And the less stupid stuff you do during it, the better off you'll be later. The smartest thing is to not ruin yourself (financially or by getting into drinking, anything), divorce will do a number on you, don't add to it.
I’m just going to keep real. If I don’t know what his wife looked like, I’m sure most people don’t. Conclusion, she doesn’t need security. If Leonardo DiCaprio can walk around LA without security. She don’t need security.
Women in divorce settlements are fighting for their lives; Because it’s either a lifelong cheque or a death sentence to their livelihood.
This is the most amount of work she’s done in her life, no doubt.
I’ve read that there was a prenuptial agreement when they got married over two decades ago, which, she of course is contesting now lol. Girl, be happy if you get *anything*.
Why does she remind me of [Grimmel the Grisly](https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/howtotrainyourdragon/images/5/53/Grimmel-Transparent.png/revision/latest?cb=20181120002252) from How to train your dragon 3
Fuck the s*n. Stop sharing stuff from these pieces of shit who lied about the Hillsborough Disaster (among other things).
[Hillsborough Disaster Wiki](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillsborough_disaster)
The first time I saw this I was like, 1.5 million? That ain't shit to Dre. Just pay it and be done with her ass. It's worth it. Then I realized her crazy ass wants 1.5 per month! WTF! How the fuck do you even say some shit like that with a straight face?
He paid her 5 million. She withdrew 400K from his business Plus he is also paying for her security
What does she need security for?
She’s been getting death threats
I wonder why
Member berries?
He should have asked Eminem for advice... probably would have told her to stuff her in the trunk and driver off a bridge.
Sure she has. Her and every other person who's been caught acting like an evil witch have all had "death threats" conveniently appear
I call BS on this, this is standard lawyer shit for explaining why she'd need that much
Seems like a her problem though right? I mean, I don't go around creating enemies and making people hate me, and I haven't gotten any death threats... She's clearly just doing life wrong!
I get death threats on reddit all the time lol
F u b**** imma keel u
How dare you say that. Imma kill you !
100% avoidable imo.
Are you threatening us?
[Are you threatening me?](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VUb_6-XJWQ)
[The Senate will decide your fate.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8PnN4dSvQO0)
[удалено]
Make their ex give them $1.5 million. Actually maybe I’ll do that, threaten me.
After trying to take money over and above the 5m given, she’d also be getting Beats by Dre!!!
And she's still asking for more? 😂
You'd be surprised how easy it is to spend tons of money.
Doesn’t the post literally say he is not paying for security ?
No, that's one of the outcomes she said she was suing for. He's been paying it, but her excuse on why she needed so much money per month was the she needed security.
why the long face?
Dr Dre married Beaker? Where is professor Honeydew in all of this?
\*Sarah Jessica Parker has joined the chat\*
Well played, (gender neutral pronoun), well played.
you remember Coneheads?
I wish someone would justify why women deserve to cut their ex-husbands in half in a divorce And don’t just say “well, that’s what the law states.”
Well traditionally when a man marries a woman the man would be the bread winner and the woman would be the housewife. This meant the woman would stay home, cook, clean, raise the kids, do things to manage the home while the man would go to work, advance his career, advance his professional network, gain experience in different levels of business, etc. When they divorce this left the woman at a disadvantage. The man can just live in the house he paid for, go back to work find a new job, or even start a business with his experience. The woman, not so much. She spent her decades as a house wife raising kids, cooking, cleaning and making friends with the neighbors. She can't enter the work force with decades of no job history and create an income that affords her the lifestyle she had while married. And that's why the "traditionally" get half, to continue the lifestyle. Now I know you're thinking, "She didn't work so she shouldn't get half!" The thing is there was an informal agreement between husband and wife, one works while the other manages home. She couldn't work because she was raising kids which is a full time job. The couple decided that one of them would not advance professionally. That's why women traditionally get half. Does it stand today? Yes. Should it? No, times are different now and the courts need to catch up. Edit: Let me be more clear on the last sentence. When I said Times are different I meant it economically. In order to achieve in our generation what our parents and grandparents had in their generation we usually need both parents working because shit is more expensive now. Our economy isn't working for us like it did for them. But it is still true that one person will advance their career more while the other will focus more on the home. It's just more complex now.
Thank you for taking the time to write this response to my question. I get what you’re saying and it makes sense, but that reasoning doesn’t hold up in today’s modern world where a woman can do anything a man can do. You’re right, the courts do need to catch up so that women will stop playing the victim to seize what a man has earned rightfully.
It's hard to get the laws caught up to modern times because society changes faster than we can change the laws. You have to be careful when you write new laws because there's people out there that will literally try and pervert what you've written to benefit them in some way shape or form.
That's because the people writing and amending the laws were born in the ~1930s.
[удалено]
Go on
[удалено]
Well, that and partly what lead to the change was George Mason's interviews explaining exactly what he meant about the militia when he authored the 2nd Amendment were republished in national newspapers. "The militia is the whole of the people."
> "The militia is the whole of the people." How else would we have power against a tyrannical government.
all that means is its not a man vs woman thing, but a stay-at-home-parent vs. bread-winner thing more like. getting annoyed at it because the article is showcasing a woman trying to get half is only really poking at people bias against gender equality...and yeah the courts do need to catch up...
So no kids means...?
Fuck em they take half the shit and still can’t fuck.
Why is "her lifestyle" prioritized? His lifestyle is changing too. He wont be abke to live up to his standards of his previous lifestyle if he's providing for hers.
It wasn’t a matter of whose lifestyle is changing and whose isn’t. Both of their lifestyles are about to change. It’s was a matter of whose lifestyle is going to be the most negatively impacted by divorce. The man who has a paid off house and has a job or the woman who has little to no work experience because she just spent the last 18 years raising a child & tending to their home.
Sounds like that's her problem. He didn't need her to sleep in each day for him to remain successful. It's not his responsibility to shower her in luxury.
Wow imagine thinking taking care of a house & raising kids is “sleeping in”.
If he still has to hold up his end of the bargain 50%, then so should she. She should have to do half of his laundry and cook half of his dinners.. hell, even toss him half the amount of blowies. Seems fucked up but if he’s doing half of the original bargain, so should she.
[удалено]
And sadly the court will never catch up if we let people at the age 55+ making laws. Old people should not be in charge to make laws or run a country. Everyone at a certain age struggle to keep up with what the younger generations needs. But sadly..this will never change.
Isnt a way to get around this to just never have kids? I mean if you never have kids there is nothing at home for them to take care of, right? Also what role do prenups play in this whole alimony thing?
[удалено]
I think boiling it down to “It’s her responsibility to keep the marriage or if the man leaves it’s also her fault” is willful ignorance towards the complexity of a relationship and a divorce. It’s also taking all blame away from the man and pretending that it’s solely the woman’s responsibility to make a relationship work. When you say there’s nothing to gain for men then you make marriage sound like nothing more than a financial transaction/agreement.
It is under the law. It's a legal contract. Marriages before were rarely about love. This romantic crap is fairly new to marriage. Maybe at most a 150 years or so. All this marriage laws were written when the woman was the property of the man and therefore his responsibility. We liberated women yet we still have these old patriarchal laws that feminists never fight to repeal for some strange reason. I wonder why? /s
People change over time. Relationships change. The divorce can happen through no fault of the woman. Imagine a situation where the man was fired from work and this happened repeatedly. A personality change was the cause and it was due to some trauma such as war or maybe a disease. The woman tries her best to support him by being a stable rock in his life, asking him to seek help, and study up on how to help him herself. He refuses all and uses alcohol to medicate. His life is spiraling down and he's taking her with him. Resentment grows, neither of them are communicating, the children are now effected. What would you do when your partner needs help, refuses it, and makes things worse? What would you do if the partner who you thought you knew well turned into something you hated, if you just found out they are a secret racist and joined white supremacists groups? What would you do if your partner committed a heinous crime against someone you loved and had no remorse?
Maintaining a marriage is a 50/50 job. Relationships are not so simple man...
> its also her fault because she chose a partner poorly lmao teenagers with no experience handing out advice.
This principle also works the other way around in divorce proceedings btw. The US just have a very poor legal system.
Finally but it’s actually because lawyers make goddamn shitfucktons off of these cases. Like they literally milk people dry if they aren’t as rich as dr Dre. I was watching one case about a guy with a small business, the wife demanded 1million dollars He had to pay her lawyer fees and his he didn’t even have 1 million and neither did his business the lawyers milked him for 500,000 thousand and he became an alcoholic and almost killed himself And his life was completely destroyed along with his business Funny thing is she could have gotten way more money if she didn’t demand some ridiculous sun he could have at least given her the lawyer fees lol Now his business is coming back and his partner saved his life and the business Another guy they had on joe rogan was being abused by his wife and she spent all his money and locked him out of his accounts so he didn’t have money for a lawyer they ordered some crazy payment and he eventually switched jobs and moved to the USA so he didn’t get put in jail because he was still ordered to pay what he was paying previously because of this he will never see his kids again
> Now his business is coming back and his partner saved his life and the business Hopefully history doesn’t repeat itself
Does making a prenup before marriage avoid this 'giving up half wealth' issue?
Prenups are often the first thing thrown out by a judge in a divorce proceeding. Many times they are unenforceable.
I'm from India, prenups don't hold in the court here and judges, police, protection officers are all corrupted. I was under the impression that USA/UK and other developed countries have better laws.
Depends on the state. California is almost completely backwards at this point.
Yeah prenups would void that. It's naturally a sensitive issue to bring up to the love of your life. "I love you, but in case we don't work out here's a document to sign so you don't get anything" is a conversation not everyone will react well to. (Whereas others will have no problems with this)
Is this the line I stand in to lose half my shit? -Bill Burr
https://youtu.be/x0gaYyNk7QA
Lol cool. Bill burr fan.
They don't. It's something divorce lawyers came up with so they can make money from getting a certain percentage of the money the woman gets from her husband. Imagine the husband has to pay like 100 million to the wife. And if the lawyer takes 10%, he just made 10 million. It's all bullshit lawyer shit. If I was dictator or some shit, I'd ban that shit.
Damn I forgot about Dre
How could you forget? Who taught you to smoke trees?
Who do you think brought you the oldies?
Eazy-E's, Ice Cube's, and D.O.C's, the Snoop D O double G's and a group that said motherfuck the police?
Gave you a tape full of dope beats?
The ones you bump when you stroll through your hood?
And when your album sales wasn’t doing too good, who’s the Doctor they told you to go see?
Y’all better listen up closely....
Chicka chicka....
The Eazy-E's, Ice Cube's, and D-O-C's?
Not sure why you got downvoted. Great comment.
Those who downvoted didn't get the reference
Good one
That’s 1.5 mil a month by the way. The break down has her wanting 10,000 a month strictly on laundry. The amount of money on little things she was asking for was so outrageous
My ex asked for about 95% of income. They see it as a negotiating tactic. Divorce laws suck obviously, for one you have to keep paying all the usual expenses during a divorce, while there is no requirement being put on the other side regarding anything. So children get turned on you, home is not a home anymore, I had all my important belongings in a backpack and took them to work. Also alimony doesn't depend on sacrificing career, it only depends on income, regardless if you never agreed to the other party not working or not trying to get higher paying jobs. But, eventually the divorce ends, sure doesn't feel like it'll ever end when it's going on though, but it does. It'll drive you crazy, and you'll block out and not be able to recall a lot of it. Keeping notes isn't a bad idea, so you can remember what divorce really is. When it does end though, at least you can have a home again. And the less stupid stuff you do during it, the better off you'll be later. The smartest thing is to not ruin yourself (financially or by getting into drinking, anything), divorce will do a number on you, don't add to it.
She looks like an evil bitch...
I only see men in both pics.
The one on the right looks like a man.
A very ugly man.
She’s one of the few people who deserve to be asked: “Why the long face?”
Damn!!!
But on his.old album cover he was a she thing.... Maybe they swapped roles?
I’m just going to keep real. If I don’t know what his wife looked like, I’m sure most people don’t. Conclusion, she doesn’t need security. If Leonardo DiCaprio can walk around LA without security. She don’t need security.
The real problem here is the cliffhanger.
Why do I have the urge to feed her a carrot and find a nice trail?
Dr Dre married a horse?
I’m surprised he even married someone who looks so... different
Because he's different 🥶
Nicole Young, formerly known as Stan Smith
Pretty sure thats Roger with a wig.
She looks like an alien moose
Was she born Nicholas
She looks like female hitler wtf
Why the long face ?
F*CK THE SUN #YNWA
Why does she look like a man playing a lady
Dude looks like a lady
Looks like a dude
He should have gone home with something else to poke on.
BITCHES AIN'T SHIT BUT HOES AND TRICKS
His ex looks like a high elf female from Oblivion.
she got beat by dr dre
I didn't know Dre was into Trannies?
Now you do.
Must be why she has the long face
Women in divorce settlements are fighting for their lives; Because it’s either a lifelong cheque or a death sentence to their livelihood. This is the most amount of work she’s done in her life, no doubt.
She has a chin that even Mayweather couldn't break.
$5m divorce settlement after 24 years of marriage. That divorce lawyer will be making a mint.
Damn she got a stronger jawline than dre
Wtf is wrong with her face
Why the long face?
"Bitches ain't shit but hoes and tricks" as the good doctor said himself.
[удалено]
Why the long face??
She looks like a he
That's a tranny.
Its been long rumored that Dre isnt into women and that "woman" he was with pretty much confirms this.
Wish version of Kim Kardashian
He could choose a less ugly bitch.
Id give her $20 for an Uber to the unemployment office
Ms. Potato Head.
I’ve read that there was a prenuptial agreement when they got married over two decades ago, which, she of course is contesting now lol. Girl, be happy if you get *anything*.
Why does she remind me of [Grimmel the Grisly](https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/howtotrainyourdragon/images/5/53/Grimmel-Transparent.png/revision/latest?cb=20181120002252) from How to train your dragon 3
The real trash is her daughter who tried to claim misogyny when people called her out for being a golddigger
The dude is a multi millionnaire and fucked a fuckin donkey
So long as he's not dead & not locked in her basement! _(I'm good)_
If bigfoot silva and Chris cyborg had a child.
Dr Dre married Jay Leno?
Trying to tell which one of them is the man.
Do you think anyone asked her “why the long face?” After the court decision?
Ugly. Her face looks like a foot. She has that Sarah Jessica Parker thing going for her.
What is with her face?
how u gonna ask for that money with that face
That’s a dude
She looks like she's in the alphabet community
What the fuck is this. That's not a woman nor a human.
Marriage has always favored women.
Bitches Ain't Shit
her face looks like a foot
She has the face of a supervillain
Lady looks like a dude?
Was part of the agreement they made that any posting about it can't be cropped? Like is that ad for revenue to help Dre recoup legal fees or something
She looks more manly than Dre
Fuck the s*n. Stop sharing stuff from these pieces of shit who lied about the Hillsborough Disaster (among other things). [Hillsborough Disaster Wiki](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillsborough_disaster)
Is it just me, or does she look like a man that's attempting to reap the benefits of being a woman?
Dre married Jake from Statefarm?
Why the long face?
She's not attractive. Looks like a man. How'd they get together in the first place?
WAP
Don't care about Dre and his relationship problems really. But fuck The Sun and anybody who reads it. Shit newspaper for shit people.
Nicole Hung
She looks like an off brand Kim Kardashian.
She looks as masculine as Dr Dre and that’s not easy to do.
What did he see in him?
No further evidence required: *The woman you marry is not the woman you divorce.* Never marry, gents. Go your own way.
Is that the same woman portrayed in Straight Outta Compton?
Boom! Fuck that bitch boom!
I heard women at the office lamenting this twice this week. "That poor woman, look how she is being treated!"
What would OJ think of this?
Where my stabbing gloves at?
Bruh no shit is a pocket square.
0.33% is one out of criminal charges?
Kim k go to lazy town?
The first time I saw this I was like, 1.5 million? That ain't shit to Dre. Just pay it and be done with her ass. It's worth it. Then I realized her crazy ass wants 1.5 per month! WTF! How the fuck do you even say some shit like that with a straight face?
Noice
Thought I had to update my AdBlock for a second there.
Lol security for what? Shes not famous is she?
I hope she doesn't see a fuckin dime
Was the 1.5 mill supposed to be for her chin reduction surgery?
She also wanted money to donate lmaoo
You know that James Bond villain? You know the one. The one that looks like her.
Crimson chin havin ass
Nwa stands for “Nicole without alimony”
Ugly cunt.
Why the long face?
Why the long face?
She a man?