Cheating Pig Still Gets Half

So many thoughts on this one.
Firstly… Sandra Bullock has absolute gina tingle over bad boy Jesse James… when surprise! He’s actually a bad boy. Never saw that one coming…
Secondly… OMG Dude WTF are you thinking??!?!
Thirdly… Sit back and laugh hysterically as a panel of three women worry that the cheating scum bucket might get to walk away from a possible divorce with half Sandra Bullock’s stuff. Jesse James might do more for Men’s Rights than all the MRA blogs put together. Just really piss all women off about divorce law…
Fourthy… big up to Fox News getting a blonde, a brunette and a redhead on the same panel. I guess that’s fair and balanced reporting…  ;-)


  1. Jesse is a moron, but then again, natural badboys tend to be lacking in common sense.

    Still, if he walks with half, watch the laws crumble. It's happening in Sweden as we speak – affirmative action and full custody/alimony is being removed as more and more men, forced to the bottom of the pile, rightfully take advatage of their laws.

    As for the panel, I'll take the blonde ;) – I normally love redheads, but this one is more strawberry-blonde and has a man's jaw.

  2. Athol Kay says:

    I'm pretty sure she'll have a pre-nup, but the the fall out from this one might actually be useful.

  3. Ferdinand Bardamu says:

    As I wrote months ago, alimony will be abolished when women have to start paying it.

  4. Athol Kay says:

    Only a matter of time for that.

  5. Sandra Bullock is clearly a victim – of her own terrible taste in men. While I think it would be entirely unfair for her to lose a dime of the money she's earned, if money is lost and bad laws get reexamined and overturned so that monogamy becomes reinforced – it's worth it. Men are fleeced all the time.

    Maybe this humiliation and theft will teach her to avoid obvious assholes in future. Or maybe not.

  6. Anonymous says:

    Sorry grerp, but Sandra Bullock isn't a victim, she's an idiot. She's a grown up and expected to make grown up decisions. She married a bad boy and got bad boy behaviour. Why is she is a victim?


  7. I'm tempted to go with slum lord on this one. On the surface it appears that he's making a very good point, but I don't think she is an idiot. She made a mistake, and she chose wrong. The guy is an @ss. Please, how do you throw Sandra away?

    I'll admit she demonstrated bad judgement, but one poor choice doesn't make one an idiot. Granted the guy chose a "criminal's name" as his moniker, and that is a bit of a red flag. Ok, it's an obvious red flag, and I don't think they get any more crimson than that…but still cut her some slack.

    Hey Sandra if your reading this and you're in need of some comfort, I'm your guy. First off, I'm not tatted up like some cellie. Secondly, I look much better in that haircut than Jessie does, and finally I don't have to "obviously pose" to get my arms to look like that.

    I'm going through a painful surprise divorce as well. The truth is we both probably work too much. I think we need each other to aid with the healing process and find balance in our lives. Trust me when I say that there is no quality in an inmate that you'd ever want in a mate. So quit with the criminal types. What you want is a Dr./ninja type. You probably just don't know it yet. Have your people call my people. We'll do lunch.


  8. Deansdale says:

    "Please, how do you throw Sandra away?"
    What is sooooo special about her that merits this question? Yeah, she's rich. So what? She might be horrible in bed, or irritating to live with. She's not a goddess. And she's not getting any younger either.

  9. I don't think she's a true victim – she made a tragically bad choice – esp. given her options, she really chose to slum it. That's what I mean by being a victim of her own terrible taste in men. She did this to herself (although he very kindly assisted).

  10. Deansdale, you must have something a whole lot better in your bed. You're a real lucky guy. You've based your entire bashing of her on speculation. I could equally argue that perhaps she's fantastic in bed, and wonderful to live with.

    Your other point was equally specious, as far as I can tell, none of us are getting any younger. It's not about the age of the car guy, it's about the mileage. Sandra's obviously still under factory warranty. Tell me you wouldn't take her for a "test drive" deansdale if given the opportunity. Kind of sounds like sour grapes to me.


  11. Wicked Shawn says:

    Too funny. "She's not getting any younger" So, now we know, thank you for enlightening us, that Sandra doesn't star in "Hot Tub Time Machine".

    Also, for those caught unaware, women have been paying child support and alimony for quite awhile now. Ever since they started marrying men who worked lower paying jobs or gained custody of the children in the divorce. That is how the laws are set up. No double standard there, it doesn't read, "The man pays the woman" Custodial parent receives payment from non-custodial parent. Petitioning spouse receives payment from respondent. Not a male female thing. Don't be such douchebags just because you were the breadwinners in your particular situations.

    As for Sandra and her choice of men, her sexual prowess, her worthiness as a partner, etc really, which one of you is actually qualified to speak to any of this? Are there not enough bullshit con artists filling the airwaves of so called news shows with this right now to satisfy you, you really have to continue it here?

  12. piterburg says:

    I have to disagree with Wicked Shawn. Yes, the laws as currently written are gender-neutral, but the administration and enforcement of these laws are not gender-neutral by any stretch of imagination.

    There is still heavy presumptions favoring women when there is a custody dispute; and in cases sole custody is assigned to a man, his ex usually escapes with no or minimal child support.

    As for alimony (and I consider alimony justified sometimes), I have seen plenty of men being forced to pay their healthy ex-wives a huge alimony for 20 years, but have yet to see a woman being a subject to that. "Go work, you lazy bum."

  13. You can't help but get a chuckle from watching these bobble-heads on the Youtube link. It appears that since he's the one who sexually wandered, he's getting pilloried whereas we're reminded that Sandra Bullock is "America's sweetheart, Miss Congeniality". Moreover, it's all "so sad" that he might get half of her earnings.

    I can't help but wonder… if the reverse had happened…, if it was revealed Sandra Bullock had wandered away from James, would these same talking heads instead consider her "empowered" and as needing to explore a necessary side of herself that's been held back by the parochial institution of marriage? Me thinks so. …And in addition, if James was the one with all the cash, would their splitting of assets in order to support the wife in her "self-exploration" still be considered so sad? Me thinks not.

    I don't support no-fault divorce in this or other instances of one-sided marital self-destruction. But when the shoe's so clearly on the other foot, and the fembot talking heads speak out the other side of their mouths on the topic, one can't help but feel some schadenfreude.

  14. Athol Kay says:

    Oh that's exactly right MNL. When I watched it seemed like it was written like a Saturday Night Live piece.

    "AND HE CAN GET HALF??!!?!"

  15. Wicked Shawn says:

    I have worked with 2 women who were paying alimony, one because her husband made too little money to maintain his marital lifestyle, the other because her husband was a 36 yr old perpetual college student.

    I also know that in Jefferson County, which is the county where Louisville is located, the system has become far more even handed about child custody, several of my male friends who actually wanted and sought custody of their children were granted equal or full custody. I know of two men currently who I have heard complain that the system favors women in child custody cases. Neither one of these men ever filed for full custody or even shared custody. Pretty damn difficult for them to know what the system would have done when they never tried, which is more often the situation!

  16. Athol Kay says:

    I think the system was designed with a default assumption that the woman would get the kids and the man would fork over cash. It's heading towards a more even balance of that, but it's not there yet. It can vary by location as well. Some places may be there, others may stay locked in the 1950s.

    Both sides to the argument can always trot out case studies to support their viewpoint.

  17. piterburg says:


    I think Athol is right on the money here.

    Since family courts are state based, their practices vary from state to state. My state (MA) seem to be less accepting of men's role as full-time fathers that some others.

    And I agree that even in our state there is a movement by family courts toward greater acceptance – men are more likely to get custody now than they were 10 years ago. I personally know at least two men who got full custody recently.

    As far as alimony is concerned – repeat, I am not aware of even one case in MA where an able-bodied man was awarded LONG-TERM alimony, while there are plenty of cases were able-bodied women were awarded lifelong alimony. Besides, in our state at least, child support often serves as alimony in disguise.

    There is an attempt at alimony reform in the works right now in our state, but it is being resisted by lawyers' lobby and by feminist groups.

  18. Deansdale says:

    "You've based your entire bashing of her on speculation."
    Saying she's not any more special then other women is not 'bashing'. It's you who's pedestalizing her.
    A friend of mine once said that you don't get bored of the (bad) quality of things, you get bored of situations. You can get bored of things which are 'good'. You can get bored of Sandra Bullock. Being rich and famous does not guarantee everlasting love.

    "Tell me you wouldn't take her for a "test drive" Deansdale if given the opportunity. Kind of sounds like sour grapes to me."
    Of course I'd take her for a test drive – for the fame of it if nothing else (preselection, social proof :) – but that does not mean she must be pleasant to live with. Maybe that Jesse James fellow didn't get from her what he wanted.
    Sour grapes? Not really. I never really liked SB that much.

  19. Most men don't fight for the children because, really, they don't want the responsibility. If they did, they would find out the laws aren't as slanted as they may think.

  20. Anonymous says:

    Well, this strengthened one blogger's point that women need to stop being attracted to as*holes..


Speak Your Mind