"How 'Stella' Gets Her Revenge"... Log Out | Topics | Search
Moderators | Edit Profile

AALBC.com's Thumper's Corner Discussion Board » The Kool Room - Archive July 2005 to April 2006 » "How 'Stella' Gets Her Revenge" « Previous Next »

Author Message
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Abm
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Abm

Post Number: 3842
Registered: 04-2004

Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!)

Posted on Thursday, July 14, 2005 - 12:22 pm:   Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

I guess some of you saw Tavis Smiley interview famed author and DL-victim Terri McMillan.

I hadn’t seen Terri interviewed before (Though I’d read a few queries of her.). And I must admit I like her more than I expected. She wears mistreated-Black-millionaress very well.

And she’s scrait-up sistahgurl, but in a GOOD way.

She all but said “No way in hell that fa&&oty n*%%@ is getting my GOTDAYAM MONEY!

Don’t you just hate it when true love comes asunder?


Alas, Tavis did his usually milquetoast interviewing that he’s grown quiet (in)famous for.

I guess it too much to expect Tavis to ask any of the following:
@ “Terri. Why would you marry someone who’s so much beneath you in age, wealth and statute, especially when that person is from a country stocked with people who desire American residence/citizenship? Shouldn’t you have known, especially given your well-acknowledged prior troubles with men, Jonathan was not what he seemed?
@ During the interview, Terri APPEARED to have said she had already initiated divorce proceedings PRIOR to Jonathan admitting he was gay. If that is true, Tavis should have asked “Why WERE you in the process of divorcing Jonathan? And if you were already divorcing him, why at this point does his sexuality really matter to you?” (Btw: I’m no attorney, but I think she may have made a COSTLY error via admitting she’d already initiated a divorce, because it seems to me a judge might use that to make his confession null/void.)
@ “Given the damage the divorce is doing to your good-name, wouldn’t be better if you tried to reach a settlement with Jonathan ASAP so you can put this sordid affair behind you?

Had Tavis intended to conduct an authentic interview and not simply gratify a fellow member of the Black glitterati, the interview might have proven informative and provided a valuable cautionary tale for other Black women who might find themselves in a situation similar to that of Terri’s.


Although I empathize a little more with Terri than I did before, I still think she (like a lot of rich MEN in a similar position) is basically pissed that she bought a boytoy has a glitch in it that cause it to toy with OTHER boys.

And, come on now. Let’s be honest about ONE thing: Twentysomething men(and women) don’t want fortysomething women(and men) unless a WHOLE LOTTA MONEY is involved in the deal.

Lastly, Terri may discover it’s best that she gives this clown some modicum of her “How Stella...’” earnings (I thinking 1 – 5%) provided he signs an ironclad hush order. That might allow her to save herself further embarrassment and to return to more productive professional and personal pursuits.


Btw: I seldom watch Tavis, so perhaps this is new only to me: But I notice he’s shaven all his facial hair and has styled his hair in way more similar to how White men often wear theirs. Funny. But I’ve observed other Black male media stars (e.g., Denzel, Will, Wesley, etc.) adopt similar grooming styles.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Anonymous
 

Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!)

Posted on Thursday, July 14, 2005 - 12:34 pm:   Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

ABM,

You are soooooo WRONG! I can attest, and affirm that what you state is so untrue, in fact quite the opposite. Twentysomething men(and women) DO want fortysomething women(and men) and there is rarely any money involved. 40ish women of today, look more like 25 year olds, are more mature, sexually unihibited and most likely have a career, a home, stability. 9 out of my 10 girlfriends in this age group that are not married are constantly attracting guys in their 20's (bc to be honest, guys in their 40's are checking for younger women).


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Yvettep
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Yvettep

Post Number: 600
Registered: 01-2005

Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!)

Posted on Thursday, July 14, 2005 - 12:35 pm:   Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Terri may discover it’s best that she gives this clown some modicum of her “How Stella...’” earnings (I thinking 1 – 5%) provided he signs an ironclad hush order. That might allow her to save herself further embarrassment and to return to more productive professional and personal pursuits.

Words of truth and wisdom. Pay him off, chalk it up to experience, channel that energy into a writing/movie project, and MOVE ON, Terry. There's a huge risk in flinging open closet doors--You publicly air other folks' soiled linens you best be sure all yours are cleaned and pressed...
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Abm
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Abm

Post Number: 3843
Registered: 04-2004

Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!)

Posted on Thursday, July 14, 2005 - 12:42 pm:   Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Anonymous,

That's a fantasy A LOT of middle age women are telling themselves so that they can feel better about aging.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Chrishayden
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Chrishayden

Post Number: 1296
Registered: 03-2004

Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!)

Posted on Thursday, July 14, 2005 - 01:08 pm:   Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Yvettep:

She is going to have to make it down and dirty nasty as it wannabe so she can get a good book out of it.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Anonymous
 

Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!)

Posted on Thursday, July 14, 2005 - 01:15 pm:   Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

ABM, I ain't got to lie about it, i live it.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Jmho
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Jmho

Post Number: 148
Registered: 03-2004

Rating: 
Votes: 1 (Vote!)

Posted on Thursday, July 14, 2005 - 03:06 pm:   Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Abm wrote:
And if you were already divorcing him, why at this point does his sexuality really matter to you?”

Well, I assume it really matter to her now because she also said he had a gay lover of 9 months, at the time of his confession. Now if he was having sex with both of them, and not using condoms, then it matters greatly.

Abm wrote:
(Btw: I’m no attorney, but I think she may have made a COSTLY error via admitting she’d already initiated a divorce, because it seems to me a judge might use that to make his confession null/void.)

Why is that? I see it just adding to a plate that’s already full. The main problem they are having is he's trying to nullify the pre-nuptial agreement.

Abm wrote:
@ “Given the damage the divorce is doing to your good-name, wouldn’t be better if you tried to reach a settlement with Jonathan ASAP so you can put this sordid affair behind you?

Who’s to say that she hasn’t? She also said in that interview, all this came about because she said No. Meaning -- you’re not getting from me what you don't deserve.

Abm wrote:
Had Tavis intended to conduct an authentic interview and not simply gratify a fellow member of the Black glitterati, the interview might have proven informative and provided a valuable cautionary tale for other Black women who might find themselves in a situation similar to that of Terri’s.

I'd would say, even so far, that they’ve learned a lot.

Abm wrote:
Lastly, Terri may discover it’s best that she gives this clown some modicum of her “How Stella...’” earnings (I thinking 1 – 5%) provided he signs an ironclad hush order. That might allow her to save herself further embarrassment and to return to more productive professional and personal pursuits.

She has given him some 'modicum" from the book, "How Stella ...". He admitted to that in the court documents. I don’t remember the exact percentage though.

And, why should she be embarrassed? He's the one admitting to taking money from her without her knowledge or consent, admitted to be confused about his sexual orientation for nearly all of his life, yet presented himself as heterosexual to her, trying to get out an legal agreement he signed before they married. etc.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Moonsigns
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Moonsigns

Post Number: 607
Registered: 07-2004

Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!)

Posted on Thursday, July 14, 2005 - 04:11 pm:   Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

"But I notice he's shaven all his facial hair and has styled his hair in way similiar to how White often wear theirs."-Abm


I was watching his show the other day and noticed the same thing. Overall, I think he has always had a very "polished" look. He is kinda handsome--nice smile--but after he cut his facial hair off....he doesn't look as....masculine. His hair looked as if it was screaming for some moisturizer.



"That's a fantasy ALOT of middle-aged women are telling themselves so they can feel better about aging."-Abm

For the most part, I agree.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Abm
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Abm

Post Number: 3845
Registered: 04-2004

Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!)

Posted on Thursday, July 14, 2005 - 04:24 pm:   Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Jmho: Well, I assume it really matter to her now because she also said he had a gay lover of 9 months, at the time of his confession. Now if he was having sex with both of them, and not using condoms, then it matters greatly.

ABM: My point is if she was divorcing him ANYWAY, why is his sexuality important? Just take a HIV test and move on. Because he could get sexually transmitted diseases from cheating with women.


Jmho: Why is that? I see it just adding to a plate that’s already full. The main problem they are having is he's trying to nullify the pre-nuptial agreement.

ABM: Again, I'm not a JD. But it seems to me that if she was going to make his sexuality the crux of maintaining the the premarital agreement (PA), the fact that she was ALREADY planning a divorce means that even if he were not gay or had not admitted it, she was still on the way out the door. Thus, a judge might conclude his sexuality is NOT what initiated/caused the break-up and shouldn't factor into whether or not to maintain the PA.


Jmho: Who’s to say that she hasn’t? She also said in that interview, all this came about because she said No. Meaning -- you’re not getting from me what you don't deserve.

ABM: Wealthy people often wisely pay to rid themselves of troubles they're barely, if at all, responsible. They do that to limit further damage to their reputation and eliminate the chance they may end-up paying MORE than they could have bargained. This is hindsight, but I wonder if she'd attempted to give him some money might she have been able to make this thing quietly disappear with just a small blurb about a divorce (between people with a 23-yr age difference) that most foks boringly figured would happen anyway.


Jhmo: I'd would say, even so far, that they’ve learned a lot.

ABM: I think they could have learned MORE than what's been presented. But maybe Terri's saving the best parts for her next book.


Jmho: She has given him some 'modicum" from the book, "How Stella ...". He admitted to that in the court documents. I don’t remember the exact percentage though.

ABM: I've NOT read the court documents. But if that's true, assuming it's what an objective party considers a reasonable compensation, I can understand why she wouldn't want to pay him another dime.


Jmho: And, why should she be embarrassed? He's the one admitting to taking money from her without her knowledge or consent, admitted to be confused about his sexual orientation for nearly all of his life, yet presented himself as heterosexual to her, trying to get out an legal agreement he signed before they married. etc.

ABM: All of that maybe true. And if she'd already compensated him for "How Stella...'", perhaps all that has followed was inevitable. Some, though, might conclude its better to pay him off and be done with it so they could spend their time/efforts/energies writing. And there is always that chance that Plummer could prevail against their premarital arrangement. Because the longer this thing stays in court, the better Plummer's chances of presenting persuasive support for his position. So you have all her 'stuff' exposed...and he gets paid.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Jmho
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Jmho

Post Number: 149
Registered: 03-2004

Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!)

Posted on Thursday, July 14, 2005 - 10:21 pm:   Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

ABM wrote:
My point is if she was divorcing him ANYWAY, why is his sexuality important? Just take a HIV test and move on.

I suspect that she has or will, but given the virus can be remain dormant for years -- it's not a case of take a test, and if it comes back negative, then you're all clear. I think he's trying to make his sexuality an issue to deflect that he misrepresented himself, among doing other things.


ABM wrote:
Because he could get sexually transmitted diseases from cheating with women.

True, but as far as we know, he wasn't cheating with women, right?


ABM wrote:
Again, I'm not a JD. But it seems to me that if she was going to make his sexuality the crux of maintaining the the premarital agreement (PA),

I don't see her as making it (his sexuality), the crux of her case, other than to say, he married her knowing he wasn't heterosexual, and to gain citizenship, hence the marriage was a fraud. She said she got gay friends, but that doesn't mean she wants to be married to someone that is.


ABM wrote:
Wealthy people often wisely pay to rid themselves of troubles they're barely, if at all, responsible. They do that to limit further damage to their reputation and eliminate the chance they may end-up paying MORE than they could have bargained. This is hindsight, but I wonder if she'd attempted to give him some money might she have been able to make this thing quietly disappear with just a small blurb about a divorce

And, I was saying we don't know if she didn't try to settle this, or if what she offered he declined, which is probably more true than not.


ABM: But maybe Terri's saving the best parts for her next book.

Maybe.


ABM wrote:
I've NOT read the court documents.

Oh. But I did figure as much. :-)

ABM wrote:
But if that's true, assuming it's what an objective party considers a reasonable compensation, I can understand why she wouldn't want to pay him another dime.

If it wasn't reasonable compensation, why not bark then, or the years immediately following, as oppose to when you're divorcing years later?

ABM wrote:
All of that maybe true.

Read the documents. Then you can eliminate some of your 'maybes'.

ABM wrote:
And if she'd already compensated him for "How Stella...'", perhaps all that has followed was inevitable. Some, though, might conclude its better to pay him off and be done with it so they could spend their time/efforts/energies writing.

But, if he won't accept, what's she is willing to pay, or what they both agreed upon before the marriage, then they're back to where they are now. I see nothing wrong with fighting for what's yours. Terry isn't a-book-a-year author, and her latest is out next week, so she got some time to write. Besides, people go through divorces and still go to work.

ABM wrote:
And there is always that chance that Plummer could prevail against their premarital arrangement.

Agree.

ABM wrote:
Because the longer this thing stays in court, the better Plummer's chances of presenting persuasive support for his position. So you have all her 'stuff' exposed...and he gets paid.

This sounds like extortion. But, then can't she counter sue him, if he doesn't prevail? From what he's presented so far, hasn't been very persuasive at all, in fact, what's he presented, it looks worst for him than her.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Abm
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Abm

Post Number: 3848
Registered: 04-2004

Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!)

Posted on Friday, July 15, 2005 - 03:04 am:   Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Jmho wrote:
I suspect that she has or will, but given the virus can be remain dormant for years -- it's not a case of take a test, and if it comes back negative, then you're all clear. I think he's trying to make his sexuality an issue to deflect that he misrepresented himself, among doing other things.

To my knowledge, the best HIV test will reveal the virus even in a dormant stage. Dormant means it’s inactive, not undetectable.


Jmho wrote:
True, but as far as we know, he wasn't cheating with women, right?

I suppose. Though he was able to bone Terri so well that she married him. So why couldn’t he do the same for/to other women?


Jmho wrote:
I don't see her as making it (his sexuality), the crux of her case, other than to say, he married her knowing he wasn't heterosexual, and to gain citizenship, hence the marriage was a fraud. She said she got gay friends, but that doesn't mean she wants to be married to someone that is.

I hope you’re correct. And perhaps I’ve read too much into her public statements when their actual court documents portray otherwise. But to be somewhat fair to Jonathan: MANY otherwise decent people enter marriages with ambivalent feelings about their sexuality. And the court may consider he met/married Terri while he was in his early 20’s, a stage where people are usually still trying to figure things out about themselves.


Jmho wrote:
And, I was saying we don't know if she didn't try to settle this, or if what she offered he declined, which is probably more true than not.

Yep. We don’t know. But Terri’s public exclamations suggest a settlement was the FURTHEST thing from her mind.


Jmho wrote:
If it wasn't reasonable compensation, why not bark then, or the years immediately following, as oppose to when you're divorcing years later?

Married foks allow things what divorcing foks don’t. Because when you’re together, you figure you’ll eventually work certain things out. When you’re splitting up, the likelihood of such precipitously drops.


Jmho wrote:
Read the documents. Then you can eliminate some of your 'maybes'.

Interesting response. But if you follow what I previously wrote, you might divine I argue Plummer might still prevail INSPITE of the “maybes”.


Jmho wrote:
But, if he won't accept, what's she is willing to pay, or what they both agreed upon before the marriage, then they're back to where they are now. I see nothing wrong with fighting for what's yours. Terry isn't a-book-a-year author, and her latest is out next week, so she got some time to write. Besides, people go through divorces and still go to work.

Of course they are. But if they were able to work something out, she’s spared herself the displeasure of all of us probing into her beeswax (plus the possibility that even WORSE things about her maybe revealed). Of course you should fight for yours. But sometimes you retain more of “yours” by giving up some. These people were together for 10 years. The court could easily conclude that Jonathan has made some contributions to her successes that an angry, indignant wife might easily ignore.



Jmho wrote:
This sounds like extortion. But, then can't she counter sue him, if he doesn't prevail? From what he's presented so far, hasn't been very persuasive at all, in fact, what's he presented, it looks worst for him than her.

HAHA! Heck. If you know anything about divorce, you know “extortion” of all types prominently figures in the proceedings. Sure she could countersue though why she’d keep this boulder rolling down the mountain I don’t know. I agree in some respects, things look bad for him. However, as I previously mentioned, I think the fact that she apparently was ALREADY divorcing prior to his gay confession him might loom LARGE here.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Chrishayden
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Chrishayden

Post Number: 1299
Registered: 03-2004

Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!)

Posted on Friday, July 15, 2005 - 10:24 am:   Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

He's already soaked her for plenty--money for a business, $200,000 from her bank account, $25,000 in attorneys fees and $2,000 a month maintenance and she is going to fork over more.

She should make a settlement before he starts spilling all her dirty little secrets and chalk it up to experience.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Abm
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Abm

Post Number: 3852
Registered: 04-2004

Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!)

Posted on Friday, July 15, 2005 - 12:23 pm:   Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Chris,

I've read most of McMillan/Plummer's divorced papers. And my preliminary conclusion is she AIN'T done PAYING!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Yvettep
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Yvettep

Post Number: 601
Registered: 01-2005

Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!)

Posted on Friday, July 15, 2005 - 12:34 pm:   Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Chris, I agree with the airing dirty laundry point (and previously said as much). No one lives with you for 10+ years without knowing some things about you. I'm not talking huge things, but even little quirky, private things shared between intimates can be things you wouldn't want to be common knowledge.

PLUS, even an accusation of bigger, untrue things--even if eventually *proved* untrue, can get you caught up needlessly in counter-accusations, attorney fees, distraction.

Look. I'm not saying Plummer is in the right. But I do not jump on the "he done her wrong" bandwagon. This brother was TWENTY (21?) when she--a full-a** grown woman--carted him off from the island. What 20 year old do you know who fully knows who he or she is? Did you at 20? I wouldn't have married a 20 year old even if I was 20 mydamnself--so I'm not talking about the age difference.

Even if he *did* know he was gay at the time, and was just a stone cold expert at hiding it for more than a decade from someone worldly and perceptive and who "has gay friends" (so presumably has some functioning gay-dar, or at least access to the gay-dar of her gay friends)--what does that matter?

For over a decade she got a companion, an accessory to take on photo ops, presumably a lover, AND a dang good muse for a story that launched her career. Successful men have been "buying" that in the form of a pretty young brides for eons. And more recently these men have been having all manner of "iron clad" pre-nups broken by their savvier-than-bargained-for exes...

Pay and walk away, I say. Pay and walk away.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Abm
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Abm

Post Number: 3857
Registered: 04-2004

Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!)

Posted on Friday, July 15, 2005 - 01:48 pm:   Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

'Vette,

THANKS!

Glad to see a FEMALE avoided tailing into the "you GO gurl" parade that typically follows such matters.

You're right. There IS a value to her having a spouse that can't be casually discarded simply by virtue of prenup.

And I've read enough of the divorce documents to see how/why the prenup might be broken: Jonathan was represented by an attorney that had been referred to him by TERRI's counsel.

That's got conflict-of-interest written ALLOVERIT to me.

Add to that dude still had baby's milk on his breadth, broke, jobless, had very modest education and probably feared being deported sans marriage, and I can see how a judge might conclude he had been taken advantage of, if not coerced.

And I think if you took all the same facts here and flipped the sexes, 'Ms. Plummer' - gay or straight - is gettin' PAID.


PS: Straight guys I know would slit your throat if you mentioned them in the same sentence with "gay porn". So how Terri could tolerate finding over a dozen tapes of such in the dude's car sounds very SUSPICIOUS to me. And I imagine a (California) divorce judge might feel the same.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Abm
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Abm

Post Number: 3858
Registered: 04-2004

Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!)

Posted on Friday, July 15, 2005 - 01:53 pm:   Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

'Vette,

And, btw, the fact that WE know that she (allegedly) caught dude with "gay porn" and accepted his stupid excuse for it is the very reason why when she had the chance she should "Pay and walk away".
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Jmho
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Jmho

Post Number: 150
Registered: 03-2004

Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!)

Posted on Friday, July 15, 2005 - 03:29 pm:   Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Abm wrote:
To my knowledge, the best HIV test will reveal the virus even in a dormant stage. Dormant means it’s inactive, not undetectable.

Again, more reason(s) to be concerned.


Abm wrote:
I suppose. Though he was able to bone Terri so well that she married him. So why couldn’t he do the same for/to other women?

I am not saying he didn't, I don't know either way. He *could have* done a lot of things. But there's a greater risk involved, if he was sexually involved with men rather than women. He strongly suggested that he’s been with men, in the last two years.


Abm wrote:
I hope you’re correct. And perhaps I’ve read too much into her public statements when their actual court documents portray otherwise. But to be somewhat fair to Jonathan: MANY otherwise decent people enter marriages with ambivalent feelings about their sexuality.

Agree, but then those people usually don't stay married, especially if they are married to a woman yet are attracted to men. When he realized he was gay, I wonder why he didn’t seek a divorce.

Abm wrote:
And the court may consider he met/married Terri while he was in his early 20’s, a stage where people are usually still trying to figure things out about themselves.

Okay, let's down this road, he said he has been struggling with his sexuality for 28 or 29 years (based on the court record), but when he met her, when he was 20, he didn't tell her that, or when they married, 6 years ago, and he was 24. And, when he knew for sure, (one article mentioned he knew something wasn't right 2.5 years ago, (that would have made him about 27.5), he still didn't tell her. He saying that he finally figures it out last year, but still didn’t tell until she confronts him, and mentions divorce, which was last December. He's had 10 years to mention to her about his 'ambivalent feelings' about his sexuality. That is what I think most decent people would have done.


Abm wrote:
Married foks allow things what divorcing foks don’t. Because when you’re together, you figure you’ll eventually work certain things out.

Obviously, he didn't work out this pre-nuptial agreement, in the 6 years they were married. He agreed to an amount before they married, and accepted that amount during the marriage, but now upon divorcing, the amount isn't fair.

Again, it takes two to work things out, and come to an agreement.


Abm wrote:
Of course you should fight for yours. But sometimes you retain more of “yours” by giving up some.

But she has been giving up some of hers. And, when will that "giving up some" be enough? He's talking like he wants half, they are in California, since he wants to throw out the agreement. Just what should she pay him, what he's asking, what she thinks is fair, just what amount. You think she should pay him, at the least, to keep his mouth shut, but what amount?


Abm wrote:
If you know anything about divorce, you know “extortion” of all types prominently figures in the proceedings.

Extortion is illegal, too.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Jmho
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Jmho

Post Number: 151
Registered: 03-2004

Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!)

Posted on Friday, July 15, 2005 - 03:48 pm:   Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Abm wrote:
Glad to see a FEMALE avoided tailing into the "you GO gurl" parade that typically follows such matters.

Yep, but instead be apart of the "you go boy" go crowd. LOL

Abm wrote:
You're right. There IS a value to her having a spouse that can't be casually discarded simply by virtue of prenup.

He's gotten more than what his value to her, I would suspect.

Abm wrote:
And I've read enough of the divorce documents to see how/why the prenup might be broken: Jonathan was represented by an attorney that had been referred to him by TERRI's counsel.

Me thinks, that's yet to be determined. He said she gave him a name of an attorney, and she said she gave him a list of names, to make a choice. But he didn't have to accept any of her suggestions, and could have gotten his own legal consel. ABM you have an interesting way of reading and interpreting. I suspect you read those documents, like you read the posts, on this board. LOL

Abm wrote:
Add to that dude still had baby's milk on his breadth,

Dude was 24 when he married. The median age for Black males at first marriage is 24.2 years old, according the 2000 census.

Abm wrote:
broke, jobless, had very modest education,

She gave him well $150,000, of which he said he was getting the interest from an investment, and he was also receiving an allowance. She then pays for him to go to college. He got an associate degree, and while working on a bachelor's degree, decided I don't like this, but had this idea to open up the business, of which she's contributed $300,000, to get him started. Now, when she sought a divorce, he wasn't jobless, he owned a business. Now, if he's broke that's his fault, not hers. If his business isn't making a profit, again his fault, not hers. This man is 30 years now, and if he's still broke, jobless and have only a modest education, then at what age should he take any responsibility for his welfare and well-being? He's been given a lot more than others have received or earned in their 20s, but he still wants a woman to hand over half her fortune. He don't want to work for his but just take hers.

Abm wrote:
and probably feared being deported sans marriage,

This gives more credence to what she's says -- he married her because he wanted citizenship. But, at the time, he had a student visa.

Abm wrote:
and I can see how a judge might conclude he had been taken advantage of, if not coerced.

Can you see how a judge might conclude that she has been taken advantage of?

So, she should have picked up, over the years that he might have been gay – the idea that he should have came out and told her is inconceivable. He was the one who thought he might have been gay, it's doesn't matter that he didn't mention this to her, but her fault she didn't know or didn’t figure it out. Sheesh!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Abm
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Abm

Post Number: 3864
Registered: 04-2004

Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!)

Posted on Friday, July 15, 2005 - 04:38 pm:   Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Jmho wrote:
Again, more reason(s) to be concerned.

Perhaps. Though I don't recall reading/hearing that either McMillan or Plummer had tested HIV+.


Jmho wrote:
I am not saying he didn't, I don't know either way. He *could have* done a lot of things. But there's a greater risk involved, if he was sexually involved with men rather than women. He strongly suggested that he’s been with men, in the last two years.

Perhaps. But for now this is just pointless speculation. Because we don't know what/whom he did, how safe he was when he did it, whether he contract an STD and what California divorce legal/judicial statues/precedent say about such. So although this might play-out well on talkshows and the Internet, it may have little bearing on how this divorce will be decided.


Jmho wrote:
Agree, but then those people usually don't stay married, especially if they are married to a woman yet are attracted to men. When he realized he was gay, I wonder why he didn’t seek a divorce.

Now THAT's a potent point. But it's one Terri eschews making, I suppose, because her counsel thinks it's more to her advantage to assert he's always KNOWN he was gay. We'll see which is the more effective strategem.


Jmho wrote:
Okay, let's down this road, he said he has been struggling with his sexuality for 28 or 29 years (based on the court record), but when he met her, when he was 20, he didn't tell her that, or when they married, 6 years ago, and he was 24. And, when he knew for sure, (one article mentioned he knew something wasn't right 2.5 years ago, (that would have made him about 27.5), he still didn't tell her. He saying that he finally figures it out last year, but still didn’t tell until she confronts him, and mentions divorce, which was last December. He's had 10 years to mention to her about his 'ambivalent feelings' about his sexuality. That is what I think most decent people would have done.

(See my response to your prior comments.)


Jmho wrote:
Obviously, he didn't work out this pre-nuptial agreement, in the 6 years they were married. He agreed to an amount before they married, and accepted that amount during the marriage, but now upon divorcing, the amount isn't fair.

Again, it takes two to work things out, and come to an agreement.

There seems some disagreement as to whether he received ALL they had agreed upon. There's some unresolved question of whether he should have received 10% of ALL the monies she's earned from "How Stella...'". He argues he only received a portion of the book earnings, not the movie and soundtrack earnings. Since neither have reproduced a binding document that specifically designates what was to be the source of their shared earnings, we can't know who's being truthful. Moreover, as I said in a prior reply to 'Vette, there may be some SERIOUS questions about the enforceablity of the prenup given the circumstances upon with it allegedly was authored/executed. As 'Vette said, this WOULDN'T be the FIRST prenup' to get tossed. My preliminary guess is these 2 points - His rightful share of "Stella" money and the questionable prenup' - are what might reach out and smack her in her 'groove' thang..


Jmho wrote:
But she has been giving up some of hers. And, when will that "giving up some" be enough? He's talking like he wants half, they are in California, since he wants to throw out the agreement. Just what should she pay him, what he's asking, what she thinks is fair, just what amount. You think she should pay him, at the least, to keep his mouth shut, but what amount?

Well, I partly address this in my comments above. But I'm not sure I agree that he's seeking half. All I've seen/read suggests he was simply trying to claim his fully agreed upon share of the "How Stella...'" receipts, money for his legal fees and temporary support/maintenance. Short of there being a prenup, I don't really find what he's seeking to be unreasonable. Now. Perhaps she could sue him for monies she alleges he embezzled. But then you're talking about thresholds of motive, opportunity, malice and benefit that might be difficult to ascend beyond a divorce court.


Jmho wrote:
Extortion is illegal, too.

Indeed. But if every crime that occurred within the context of a divorce were prosecuted, at least half of ALL the people who have ever divorced will have done prison time.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Yvettep
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Yvettep

Post Number: 603
Registered: 01-2005

Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!)

Posted on Friday, July 15, 2005 - 05:07 pm:   Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

but instead be apart of the "you go boy" go crowd

Nowhere in my comments on this matter have you heard me say "You go, boy" to the soon-to-be ex-Mr. McMillan. It's not about what he deserves, but about what she should do for her best interests. And I still say, "Pay, and walk away."
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Lily
Unregistered guest

Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!)

Posted on Friday, July 15, 2005 - 06:40 pm:   Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Come on people.

I'm certain that Terry can find some "male" that he screwed around in Jamaica with as a teen to come forward.

Then another one that he kissed on during their marriage.

The divorce papers reek with too many names of his gay friends. Other gays probably won't be so friendly.

Terry stated on Tavis that she's smarter than Jonathan and has endless money to fight this with. I agree with her.
The longer it plays out, the more his homosexuality becomes explored and the DownLow risks becomes a buzz item, the less sympathy he will probably retain. Think about that.



Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Abm
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Abm

Post Number: 3868
Registered: 04-2004

Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!)

Posted on Friday, July 15, 2005 - 08:46 pm:   Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Jmho wrote:
Yep, but instead be apart of the "you go boy" go crowd. LOL

HAHA!!! Aight now. I got your "BOY" right here!


Jmho wrote:
He's gotten more than what his value to her, I would suspect.

That's an easy conclusion to draw. But it may not, in fact, be accurate.


Jmho wrote:
Me thinks, that's yet to be determined. He said she gave him a name of an attorney, and she said she gave him a list of names, to make a choice. But he didn't have to accept any of her suggestions, and could have gotten his own legal consel. ABM you have an interesting way of reading and interpreting. I suspect you read those documents, like you read the posts, on this board. LOL

I can see a court considering his subordinant age, education, wealth (of lack their of) and tenuous American residency compelled him to go with her wishes, including using an attorney that had been referred to him by her counsel.


Jmho wrote:
Dude was 24 when he married. The median age for Black males at first marriage is 24.2 years old, according the 2000 census.

Interesting. Though, considering the general state of marriage amongst AA's, I guess that shouldn't surprise me. Also, how many of those 24 year olds are marrying women TWICE their ages who've got the ends to have their a$$e$ strapped to the back banana boats that are on one-way trips to Jamaica?


Jmho wrote:

She gave him well $150,000, of which he said he was getting the interest from an investment, and he was also receiving an allowance. She then pays for him to go to college. He got an associate degree, and while working on a bachelor's degree, decided I don't like this, but had this idea to open up the business, of which she's contributed $300,000, to get him started. Now, when she sought a divorce, he wasn't jobless, he owned a business. Now, if he's broke that's his fault, not hers. If his business isn't making a profit, again his fault, not hers. This man is 30 years now, and if he's still broke, jobless and have only a modest education, then at what age should he take any responsibility for his welfare and well-being? He's been given a lot more than others have received or earned in their 20s, but he still wants a woman to hand over half her fortune. He don't want to work for his but just take hers.

Okay. Let's try to at least observe the facts has they've been presented. In the portion you reference here, I was referring to the circumstances upon which he conceded to the prenup. Now. The $150K was paid into an account that Jonathan (apparently) never received. The $300K was invested AFTER they'd already married. Now I concur with the essence of what you say about him being able to earn a living. But that doesn't mean he wasn't entitled to some form of settlement from marriage he may have made some contributions to and some disputed portion of her "Stella....'" earnings. And hey, money changes hands in a marriage. And the more money there is, the MORE changes hands.


Jmho wrote:
This gives more credence to what she's says -- he married her because he wanted citizenship. But, at the time, he had a student visa.

His wanting to be an American resident/citizen does NOT prove he intended to deceive her.


Jmho wrote:
Can you see how a judge might conclude that she has been taken advantage of?

So, she should have picked up, over the years that he might have been gay – the idea that he should have came out and told her is inconceivable. He was the one who thought he might have been gay, it's doesn't matter that he didn't mention this to her, but her fault she didn't know or didn’t figure it out. Sheesh!

Yep. I can see THAT too. He should have told her. But a LOT of people have gay feelings who manage to eschew gay sex. Some guys screw other guys. Others jack-off to "gay porn". He'd HARDLY be the first man (or woman) to keep THAT secret, even when there's no money/citizenship at risk.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Jmho
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Jmho

Post Number: 152
Registered: 03-2004

Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!)

Posted on Friday, July 15, 2005 - 11:08 pm:   Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Abm wrote:
Perhaps. But for now this is just pointless speculation.

The man said <begin> I never engaged in any homosexual activity prior to marriage and during the first four years of my marriage. <end> It seems reasonable to conclude that he did more likely engage in such, in those 2 later years, than not. The fact he neglected to mentioned, the last 2 years of his marriage, raises the question. You see this as pointless, that's fine by me.



Abm wrote:
(See my response to your prior comments.)

Okay but it doesn't address what I wrote.



Abm wrote:
There seems some disagreement as to whether he received ALL they had agreed upon. There's some unresolved question of whether he should have received 10% of ALL the monies she's earned from "How Stella...'". He argues he only received a portion of the book earnings, not the movie and soundtrack earnings.

Regarding this and the initial $150,000 she gave him. He says: the $150,000 was for the book but he didn't received of any of the disbursement, as the money was sent to his parents. Then he also says, in 1995 he got $50,000, which was 50% of the $150,000 (actually 50% of $150,000 is $75,000) -- his share of the royalties for the book. Then, he says in 1996, he was given $100,000 which was part of the 10% due him and he was also receiving $800 monthly interest payments from the $150,000 that was sent to Jamaica to be invested.

Her version: she gave him $50,000 in 1995 and $100,000 in 1996 as gifts -- so he''ll have some money on his own. For 3 years, he lived off the interest from those monies, which was invested in Jamaica. In 1998, as part of the prenup agreement, he would receive 10% of the royalties from the book, movie and soundtrack.

Okay, he's saying he never received anything from these royalties, beyond the $150,000, so why in the world, would he wait until 2005 and say she owes him 10% of the royalties? It seems she has the prenup, that references this 10% but don't konw if he has another signed agreement saying something totally different. I don't know if he got it or not, but I can't believe he went all those years, and didn't get what he was due, and never said a word. If the 10% is due upon divorce, well it's hasn't been granted yet.

Abm wrote:
Since neither have reproduced a binding document that specifically designates what was to be the source of their shared earnings, we can't know who's being truthful.

You don't know what's binding documents that been produced or reproduced. LOL There are 4 documents from him and one from her posted online, and all of those documents reference other documents and attachments, submitted to the court. Interesting you don't see her original petition for divorce, which she filed in January.



Abm wrote:
Well, I partly address this in my comments above. But I'm not sure I agree that he's seeking half. All I've seen/read suggests he was simply trying to claim his fully agreed upon share of the "How Stella...'" receipts, money for his legal fees and temporary support/maintenance.



He is also asking the court to determine if the prenup is valid and claims he signed under duress. The judge had ordered her to pay him $2000 for three months; the case goes to trial in October. And, she had to pay $25,000 for his attorney fees. But, he also wants the prenup to be nullified, which says upon a divorce, he doesn't get any money, beyond the 10% fo royalities for the book, movie and soundtrack. If he didn't want any of her money beyond royalties from the book, movie and soundtrack, of which he claims he hasn't gotten, why then is he trying to have the entire agreement tossed? Why not just dispute those 3 things, in the agreement, and keep the rest of it?

Abm wrote:
Short of there being a prenup, I don't really find what he's seeking to be unreasonable. Now. Perhaps she could sue him for monies she alleges he embezzled.

And, to which he admits in his answer, he stole the money from her and agreed to pay back, of which he hasn't. So this goes beyond allegedly.

Abm wrote:
But then you're talking about thresholds of motive, opportunity, malice and benefit that might be difficult to ascend beyond a divorce court.

Well, the man admitted to taking the money. He explains his motive, opportunity and benefit in an e-mail to her when he admitted to stealing the money, as well in his response. He says she gave him her ATM and PIN to make a withdrawal. Since he said she hasn't been giving him an allowance, he thought it would be okay to make withdrawals of $62,000 over 2 years, without her consent or knowledge. He also said he knew that she didn't know what the balance was in the account, and figured she wouldn't know the money was missing. Then, he said he took the money for living/household expenses, to take her to dinner and to buy her flowers and gifts, as well as her son. He claims she should have known he was taking her money since he wasn't making enough to do what he was doing financially. LOL

Abm wrote:
Indeed. But if every crime that occurred within the context of a divorce were prosecuted,

You mean in the context of a marriage? He stole the money from her before 2004.

Abm wrote:
at least half of ALL the people who have ever divorced will have done prison time.

So be it.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Jmho
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Jmho

Post Number: 153
Registered: 03-2004

Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!)

Posted on Friday, July 15, 2005 - 11:14 pm:   Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Yvettep wrote:
Nowhere in my comments on this matter have you heard me say "You go, boy" to the soon-to-be ex-Mr. McMillan.

You're absolutely correct but did I say you that you said "you go, boy" in your comments. Abm mentioned that he was "Glad to see a FEMALE avoided tailing into the "you GO gurl" parade". To which, I don't recall anyone saying, "you go gurl" either, in this discussion. The comment was a play on his comment, if one isn't in the you go gurl crowd, then they're in the you go boy crowd. But you say you're not in that crowd. I accept that.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Jmho
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Jmho

Post Number: 154
Registered: 03-2004

Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!)

Posted on Friday, July 15, 2005 - 11:27 pm:   Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

ABM wrote:
Okay. Let's try to at least observe the facts has they've been presented. In the portion you reference here, I was referring to the circumstances upon which he conceded to the prenup. Now. The $150K was paid into an account that Jonathan (apparently) never received.

But he also admitted to receiving $800 a month interest payments from the $150,000 she gave him, which was invested in Jamaica, back in 1995 and 1996. Now he claims due to bad investments, the money is nearly gone. But that's not Terry's fault. All investments involve risk.

This are my parting words/thoughts on this -- in his desire to seek temporarily support, he says he was 24 and faced being deported, though his visa didn't expire until 3 or 6 years later, depends upon who you believe, and which visa he's talking about (he had a visitor visa and a student visa). Claims he had no job skills, though he had worked on the movie set for Stella, had a job in some skin care center and had acquired a degree, no money and his income was totally depended upon Terry, guess he wasn't ignoring those interest payments. He lived in this big house, drove her luxury cars and was totally dependent upon her. So, in his mind, he had no choice sign the prenup. He couldn't go back to Jamaica because he feared for his safety but when he signed the prenup, in 1998, he wasn't out of the closet, so to speak, and hadn't decided or declared he was gay, so how was his safety an issue then?

But, then he comes back, in a separate document and says, I did not have to marry Terry. I did not have to live with her, I did not have to love her. He says, there were younger and more attractive women, he could have been with. He said he was in love and wanted to marry her. But, then the next paragraph, he says, she was the one who decided they should get married. Things went as she demanded.

He needs to decide which it is. Either he had a choice or he didn't. He's playing both sides against the middle.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Abm
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Abm

Post Number: 3869
Registered: 04-2004

Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!)

Posted on Saturday, July 16, 2005 - 07:17 am:   Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Moonsigns,

Yeah. Tavis got that LA Man, metrosexual look they all seem to adopt on the Left coast. But, hey, the women (and MEN) out that way dig it.


Regarding aging:
Hey. There comes a time when we ALL are not as cute as we thought we (though, perhaps never really) were. But we grow in other areas and learn that beauty really is only skin deep.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Viqi_french
Newbie Poster
Username: Viqi_french

Post Number: 3
Registered: 07-2005

Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!)

Posted on Saturday, July 16, 2005 - 12:34 pm:   Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

I don't know from "Mr. McMillan" and the $150,000 vs. $300,000, etc. All I know is that somebody got some very expensive "Dexter" for a good number of years. And at some point, it may well be worth whatever it'll cost to get rid of "Dexter" and his DL Groove Thang!

By the way... It is true: Many younger men DO actively seek middle-aged women. Why's it so hard for some to believe?! Younger men have told me that women their own age often seem immature, possessive, and put unpleasant pressure on them. The older woman, on the other hand, probably has all her own stuff -- esteem, career, finances already on track. If she's taken care of herself, she's a prize in many ways.

Last but not least, many men want a "mommie." A girl his own age may be looking for him to be her "daddy," but he may not feel like taking on all that manly responsibility. With an older woman, all he has to do is show up with Dexter, and not embarrass her too badly at the office party! (tee-hee)

Again, if you understand the serious importance of "getting your groove back," then you KNOW these May-December relationships can save your life. I guess we're seeing how expensive they can be in divorce court. But if girlfriend was miserable and whatnot before him, I guess she got her money's worth.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Moonsigns
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Moonsigns

Post Number: 615
Registered: 07-2004

Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!)

Posted on Saturday, July 16, 2005 - 05:40 pm:   Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Abm,

True, true--Tavis is looking a bit too 'pretty' nowadays. There are definitely some major differences in how men dress on the West Coast compared to the East Coast (I've lived on both)--I prefer the style/look of the northern, East Coast much more (just me). I also think that Black men on the East Coast tend to have better barbers. The hair cuts/styles on some Black men I used to see were horrible on the West Coast, and I never understood why. I know that is such a generalization but that has been my observation. I also like facial hair on men--it makes them look more masculine. Tavis's face looks like a....bare butt--he kinda of looks gay now. Let me write him a letter (teehee). Just kidding--I still enjoy his show....let me stop!

Yeah. We all we learn in time that beauty is only 'skin deep' but I want to age gracefully--and plan to do so! NO face lifts either--no fake mess!

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Moonsigns
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Moonsigns

Post Number: 616
Registered: 07-2004

Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!)

Posted on Saturday, July 16, 2005 - 06:09 pm:   Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

About younger men seeking middle-aged women....


I believe that younger men are telling the truth in regards to younger women being insecure etc.etc., however, they seek out older women mainly to be pampered and to be sexed without being bothered afterwords--purely selfish reasons. Older women need the affirmation that they are still wanted and desirable, which is totally natural, but to think a young man *really* wants them for good intentions, is purely ridiculous. Men love sex and younger men love it even more. While they are having sex with 'the older woman' (no strings attached) they are also having sex with 'the younger woman'. In the end, both the younger woman and older woman are getting screwed (excuse the pun). I don't know why women want to believe any different.

Older men, though the think the younger 'cutie' *really* wants them, they are getting screwed, too--they're, generally, too dumb and egotistical to know any better, though. I think older women, deep (DEEP) in their hearts, know they truth!

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Moonsigns
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Moonsigns

Post Number: 617
Registered: 07-2004

Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!)

Posted on Saturday, July 16, 2005 - 06:15 pm:   Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

About TM....

I just hope she can resolve this issue as quickly and quietly as possible. I know it's humiliating for her, which is so understandable--I wouldn't want him to have my money, either!!!! However, just to get him out of my life, I'd write 'sweet thang' a check, be done with it and move on!



Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Abm
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Abm

Post Number: 3873
Registered: 04-2004

Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!)

Posted on Saturday, July 16, 2005 - 09:37 pm:   Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Jmho,

He took money from her without her permission.

She discovered his deception and forgave him.

He received gifts and loans from her amounting to at least $400K.

She apparently owes him movie/soundtrack monies from "Stella".

He may have dated/married her in part to secure American residency/citizenship.

She may have coerced a man 23 years her junior into signing a prenup under some unfair/bias circumstances.

He did not admit to her he might be gay prior to their marriage.

She received evidence YEARS ago asserting he's probably gay.

He may have engaged in risky extramarital sex.

She may be a homophobe.


THIS is why smart rich foks usually buy their way out of mistakes and be done with it!


Here are 3 items you might find interesting:

Jonathan's rebuttal appear to include a math error. 50% of $150K is $75K, NOT $50K. (Chris H. don't you JD's have to study math in college like the rest of us?)

Terri says a $150K was gift. Jonathan claims it was partial compensation for "Stella". It seems to me Jonathan would have been better off agreeing it was a gift thus potentially boosting his settlement for "Stella".

Question: If Terri and Jonathan submitted separate tax returns during the years he was siphoning money from her bank, and he didn’t report the money he took as income on 1040's, has Jonathan committed tax evasion?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Abm
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Abm

Post Number: 3874
Registered: 04-2004

Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!)

Posted on Saturday, July 16, 2005 - 09:57 pm:   Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Moonsigns,

YOU made the gay inference about Tavis' new look. Not me. (I was THINKING it, but I didn't SAY it.)


I concur with you about these alleged Demi-Ashton romances that foks think are the rage (though I HEAR more about them than I actually SEE them). While a young man certainly can appreciate certain creature-comforts associated with dating older women, when it's said/done, young men (and young women) want young women (and young men).

Because it's only natural that people who are in the full bloom of their reproductive prowess would be more attracted to each other.

You best believe 'grandma' your post-pubescient boytoy is boning someone his age too...possibly your DAUGHTER!


So you're saying you wouldn't get butt injections to be as bootylicious as Beyonce?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Moonsigns
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Moonsigns

Post Number: 618
Registered: 07-2004

Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!)

Posted on Sunday, July 17, 2005 - 04:05 pm:   Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Abm,

I don't need a 'butt injection', and I wouldn't want a booty like hers anyway. Two reasons. One, while I don't consider myself vain, I am, for the most part, extremely content with my body, my health and my beauty. Second, while Beyonce is (no doubt) a stunning beautiful (young) woman (her face is absolutely AMAZING), the body and booty *may* not endure the test of time (the comfort of marriage, pregnancy/childrearing etc.) Look at her mom--that should say it all.

Lastly, I simply like natural beauty. Plastic surgery, especially on white women, is SO noticeable. It's usually pretty ugly *most of the time*, too--like the woman's face has been in a horrendous wind tunnel and the rest of the skin on her body is like a prune. Yuck.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Moonsigns
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Moonsigns

Post Number: 619
Registered: 07-2004

Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!)

Posted on Sunday, July 17, 2005 - 04:07 pm:   Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Abm,

About Tavis, let's just hope the brother isn't gay. That would be so disappointing (to me)!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Abm
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Abm

Post Number: 3875
Registered: 04-2004

Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!)

Posted on Sunday, July 17, 2005 - 04:56 pm:   Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Moonsigns,

I was just pulling your leg. I too suspect Beyonce's going to struggle in the bootay department once gravity and metabolism begins to turn against her. Though, I guess by that time, she'll more work done on her than what's been done on the Statue of Liberty.

It never ceases to amaze me how women blind themselves to the ill-effects that plastic surgery has on their appearance.

Take the fine Fox TV host Greta Van Sustren. She'e GOT to know her mouth has been crooked ever since she got nippped/tucked a few years back.


Do I think Tavis is gay: No.

Would I be surprised to discover Tavis (or, really, ANY media personality based/employed in the LA area): No!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Viqi_french
Newbie Poster
Username: Viqi_french

Post Number: 5
Registered: 07-2005

Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!)

Posted on Monday, July 18, 2005 - 11:39 am:   Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Moonsigns,

Well at least we agree that younger men seek older women for the pampering and sex without pressure afterward. But here's the newsflash that I think you're missing: older women feel the same way!! I know, because I am one of these women who's had this "younger man" experience a time or two... ;-)

I've got a few years behind me, but melanin has been VERY good to me. So I still want a man with a fairly flat stomach and muscles in tact. And I want him to be open-minded and fun, not lazy and selfish in the sack. And I want his butt to know how to go the heck home! (Maybe that's the inner-younger-man in ME speaking?!)

My point is, please don't think that older women are getting used by younger men. Sometimes, the older woman is doing just as much "using" as the young buck, baby!

Just like any other relationship: As long as both parties are fulfilled, let us cheer that somebody somewhere is happy in this crazy world in which we live. I can't frown upon what may well be nice, comfortable relationships that make both parties happier than they've ever been.

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Viqi_french
Newbie Poster
Username: Viqi_french

Post Number: 6
Registered: 07-2005

Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!)

Posted on Monday, July 18, 2005 - 11:54 am:   Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Moonsigns,

Greta Van Susteren? lol I'm glad she had that face lift. Do you remember how she USED to look?! The woman was looking pretty haggard.

But I generally agree with you. Plastic surgery is an awful addiction for some. When I think of Michael J. and that "Cat Woman" rich lady whose faces have been destroyed by the knife, I think I'll just try to live with the puss I've got!

P.s. Do you think it's true that M.J. had to have some type of "nose form" attached to his face? I kind of believe it, based on the crumbled nose I once saw photos of. But now, the nose looks whole again.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Moonsigns
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Moonsigns

Post Number: 620
Registered: 07-2004

Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!)

Posted on Monday, July 18, 2005 - 01:26 pm:   Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Viqi French,

My observations are definitely general. Naturally, I could never doubt that there are younger men and older women who find these types of relationships mutally beneficial. Although, because of the nature of these affairs, I would think that they are pretty short-lived and "surface". Meaning, they are physically gratifying (and physical gratification is important at times) yet leave more to be desired.

I understand your point about wanting a man who still has a fairly flat stomach, muscles in tact, and is open-minded and fun in the sack. That is fair enough--older men seek out younger women for much of the same reasons.

While I don't think *all* women are getting used by younger men, I think a lot end up that way. Reason being, by nature, men and women view sex so differently. Afterawhile, those "soul ties" begin to get in the way.....and, the older woman *just might* begin to feel a bit jealous (and feel used) when the hot, young, eye-candy he's *proably* also having sex with (too) is getting dates out-on-the-town rather than just a romp in the bed. And, again, I don't doubt that the "young buck" isn't getting used. But, really, the average younger man, at least in my opinion, doesn't have too much to offer a seasoned, older, intelligent woman with the exception of his high "drive"--which at that point in her life, is about all they have in common.

If you can do your thing and it makes you happy--and your feelings don't get hurt, so be it. I'm no one to tell you different.

:-)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Moonsigns
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Moonsigns

Post Number: 621
Registered: 07-2004

Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!)

Posted on Monday, July 18, 2005 - 01:34 pm:   Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Abm,

I agree, Greta Van Sustren's plastic surgery left her mouth a tad jacked. However, her skin looks (ever so) slightly better--a bit smoother. She proably had some kind of peel.

I don't *think* Tavis is really gay--he is just falling into that meterosexual thang. But, it wouldn't surprise me either if he made some announcement like that. I just think it's the soft look, though. Not for the reason that he is a media personality in Los Angeles. Why wouldn't you be "surprised" if any media personality within the LA area announced they are gay? What dynamic do you think is involved out there that makes you feel this way?

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Chrishayden
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Chrishayden

Post Number: 1325
Registered: 03-2004

Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!)

Posted on Thursday, July 21, 2005 - 02:52 pm:   Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Why are we here discussing that sad sack of bones Greta Van Susteren?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Kc_trudiva
AALBC .com Platinum Poster
Username: Kc_trudiva

Post Number: 91
Registered: 04-2004

Rating: 
Votes: 1 (Vote!)

Posted on Friday, July 22, 2005 - 01:32 pm:   Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Moonsign wrote:
While I don't think *all* women are getting used by younger men, I think a lot end up that way. Reason being, by nature, men and women view sex so differently. Afterawhile, those "soul ties" begin to get in the way...and, the older woman *just might* begin to feel a bit jealous (and feel used) when the hot, young, eye-candy he's *proably* also having sex with (too) is getting dates out-on-the-town rather than just a romp in the bed. And, again, I don't doubt that the "young buck" isn't getting used. But, really, the average younger man, at least in my opinion, doesn't have too much to offer a seasoned, older, intelligent woman with the exception of his high "drive"--which at that point in her life, is about all they have in common.

Hmm, no wonder people look at me an my (older) husband so funny. I take him everywhere. He's 20 years my senior and I get the same response often, "I can't figure out what you're doing with an older man." My response, "then stop trying to."

My husband and I are complete opposites. He's loves to spend, spend, spend and I love to save and put away for rainy days. But I understand his spending habits. He's older, retired and feels he's earned the priviledge. Shit, put that money away until we're both retired and let me help spend the money too.

Neither of us feel used in anyway. Our sex drive is equal. If I feel I'm overworking him (wink), I'll sleep in the other room for a week or so to give him time to recoup for our next "romp." AHAHA.

What's my point? Uhmm, I don't believe I had one. Just consider this my two cents about the May-December or older man/younger woman subject. Now, can I get some change?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Viqi_french
Newbie Poster
Username: Viqi_french

Post Number: 16
Registered: 07-2005

Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!)

Posted on Saturday, July 23, 2005 - 04:10 am:   Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

KC Trudiva,

I liked that post. :-) Especially the part about sleeping in the other room for a week! lol

I'm nowhere NEAR retired, yet need my sweetie to PUH-LEEZE sleep in the other room sometimes. Anyone who understands the need for their mate to enjoy the mattress solo now and then is all right with me!

Add Your Message Here
Posting is currently disabled in this topic. Contact your discussion moderator for more information.

Topics | Last Day | Last Week | Tree View | Search | Help/Instructions | Program Credits Administration
Our Mission
To promote the diverse spectrum of literature written for, or about, people of African descent by helping readers find the books and authors they will enjoy.  We accomplish our goals through AALBC.com, our related platforms, and strategic partnerships.
Main Sections
Profiled Authors
Book Lists
Book Reviews
Writers’ Resources
Movie Reviews
Celebrity Interviews
Events
Discussion Forums
Current eNewsletter
Fun Stuff
Founder’s Blog
About Us
Started in 1997, AALBC.com (African American Literature Book Club) is the largest, most frequently visited web site of its kind. Learn more.

About Our Webmaster & Founder
Affiliated Websites
Huria Search
Edit 1st
Domains for Authors
ABLE
Power List Bestsellers
AALBC.com's Book Club Archive
Customer Service
About AALBC.com
Subscribe
Marketing Kit
FAQ
Contact Us
Advertising Rates
Advertiser Login
Privacy Policy
Affiliates