aca77:

So Eva Longoria and Tony Parker are not in the same "class"? So Mark Zuckerberg should marry Oprah Winfrey just to have peace of mind that one blood sucking thing would not dupe him off the fortune his brain and hard work earned him? You women have to show that you have some sense in your skulls. Make the gender equality crusade real by demonstrating you can actually reason. Otherwise the moderators could as well lock this darn thread. Lets call it a day.

no idea who tony parker is.

i'm just tired of all this whining when you're not even married and no fiancee is even in sight talkless wife.

yorubas have the proverb of tortoise who said he wanted to buy a car. His son said he was going to ride the car in a rough manner. Tortoise then got so angry he beat the child almost to a coma. Over a car he hadnt yet bought.


Save yourselves and the rest of us a lot of trouble and stay away from women who dont make as much as you. That way you can be sure she wont need your money after you split up.

of course you have to protect your assets from your booty calls, one of whom will eventually become your wife, but i'm sure there are more pragmatic ways to approach the issue.

Nekai:

It's interesting that some men on here are spending more effort trying to protect their potential wealth than their potential marriage. Tiger's wife would have preferred a peaceful home to the millions. In every case discussed here, including the most recent Eva/Tony split, infidelity was the case of the divorce.

Utter clunking rubbish!

50% of marriages FAIL!

If a man is going to bare the brunt of injustice, he better, if he has any brains, prepare for the possibility as best as it suits his appetite for the injustice.

Nekai:

Why all this talk about the injustice of the divorce settlement without denouncing the infidelity that caused the divorce in the first place?

Utter clunking rubbish!

Like if women don't cheat!

Cut the crap. I move with guys. There are several married women that give it up. If you know how many married women in Nigeria I have heard of fly to London and meet up with men, you will shiver. One was banging an older friend's cousin in the kitchen whilst her kids were sleeping upstairs. History can tell us very well how many women leave their husbands in Nigeria for richer men if they can pull one.

Oh, women are sooooooooooo innocent?

Victims!

Furthermore, what makes you not think of other causes of marriage breakdown? The ones that lead to very limited options but infidelity.

Nagging and arguments? Illogicality and selfishness? Lack of taking care of ones appearance as best as nature allows? Useless in the home?

Cut the crap, whatever reason drives people apart should have NO BUSINESS in divorce settlements!

Nekai:

If a new law was passed stating that anyone who knowingly violates a child under 10 years old, has to surrender 95% of his entire wealth to the child and the child's parents, as well as spend the rest of his life in jail, would we be here talking about the injustice of the despoiler settlement? Would I hear men talking about the fact that the medical bills couldn't possibly have added up to this amount? No, because that would be absurd.

Paedophilia being compared to infidelity.

Honestly, I best not comment.

People know I don't debate at such intellectual level civilly.

Nekai:

The divorce settlement isn't an adultary settlement, true, but for those who don't believe that the woman couldn't have possibly contributed enough to recieve half the wealth that was earned during the marriage, you are basically stating that the law ends up compensating women for the fact that her husband was adulterous. Under that premise, why the opposition? All because "Men have to fight their biology and demonstrate discipline to not go how nature pushes them."? These men should have never got married if they needed a multitude of women.

Again, get it in your head. WOMEN CHEAT TOO!

Again, get it in your head. THE COURTS SHOULD HAVE NO BUSINESS IN RELATIONSHIPS OF TWO ADULTS for divorce settlement purposes! Especially when the same courts can not apply the laws fairly AT ALL TIMES (i.e. when the less wealthy partner is the one that cheats).

Nekai:

Many times adultary is sought because of problems in the home. A real man/woman wouldn't use that as an excuse to defile themselves. If the problems are that bad then walk away, and if the problems aren't bad enough to exit the marriage, the unhappy spouse should make every effort to salvage it (and not be like Tiger and have affairs with waitresses, strippers, and indecency stars). Bottom line, when voluntarily taking on the role of head of the household, and husband, men should be strong enough to fight these primitive biological impulses. If Tiger had done this, we wouldn't be here talking about his voluntary divorce settlement amount that was 50 million dollars more than their prenup stipulated. If Tiger's wife is wrong, it would be for selling her silence for 50 million dollars.

Like if women walk away.

If I got a pound everytime a woman said that and then does not do it herself, I will be a millionaire. I know of girl's that have preached "don't cheat, walk away" but then cheat on their boyfriends, then they deny it to their bone if not caught redhanded or try and throw the blame on the guy for "pushing them to cheat". The average woman is adept at lying to others and even herself to the point she starts believing her own lies. That is why (plus emotions) they say one thing today and do the opposite tommorrow.

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-620381.64.html#msg7900509

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-620381.64.html#msg7901560

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-620381.96.html#msg7907463

So tell me what the law should do to a wife of a millionaire that cheats? Will the courts also award him her assets?

^^werent you the one who a year or so ago strongly defended your right to cheat on any woman and insisted no female should ever expect you not to cheat on her?

i guess what you have to look forward to is everlasting anxiety about being two timed, since guilty conscience no go gree you rest.

besides, hoochies may be the only type of women you're attracted to, and in that case, you do feel the need to anticipate their cheating and also protect your assets from them since nothing go remain if every single one of them tries to clean you out financially.

tpiah!:

^^werent you the one who a year or so ago strongly defended your right to cheat on any woman and insisted no female should ever expect you not to cheat on her?

i guess what you have to look forward to is everlasting anxiety about being two timed, since guilty conscience no go gree you rest.

besides, hoochies may be the only type of women you're attracted to, and in that case, you do feel the need to anticipate their cheating and also protect your assets from them since nothing go remain if every single one of them tries to clean you out financially.

Can you show me where I ever said that?

I wait!

you have so many posts and it will be hard finding it.

i can try however.

i think the topic of discussion was about a party or something, then you came up with that statement.

tpiah!:

you have so many posts and it will be hard finding it.

i can try however.

i think the topic of discussion was about a party or something, then you came up with that statement.

Please try.

I wait.

Try the search function with keywords: "Sagamite", "party", "cheat"

I have the patience to wait.

mi o ri jo.

you'll either have to take my word for it or denounce it as a lie.

i dont think i have the patience to go through all your posts.

however, it was after you'd gone on multiple tirades about the virtues of non-nigerian women's butts and easy access to their wetincall, coupled with your usual bashing of nigerian women.

a little while later there was a thread which i believe was about parties or something, and you suddenly popped the comment about you having the right to cheat no matter what.

i think i commented on your post then but i'm not sure.

tpiah!:

mi o ri jo.

you'll either have to take my word for it or denounce it as a lie.

i dont think i have the patience to go through all your posts.

however, it was after you'd gone on multiple tirades about the virtues of non-nigerian women's butts and easy access to their wetincall, coupled with your usual bashing of nigerian women.

a little while later there was a thread which i believe was about parties or something, and you suddenly popped the comment about you having the right to cheat no matter what.

i think i commented on your post then but i'm not sure.

Stop chatting shyt!

i've said my own.

you're free to take offence because people disagree with you.

saga, na person like you dey lost money to wifey, see your old 1 year post eh
look, i don't need your money. if you want a prenup, fine come with one.
i will only take a cheating man's ALL (money and everything!!) you know, use your money to appease/comfort myself

michelin89 said it better and i agree.

What of mine? Would you take mine too?

armyofone:

saga, na person like you dey lost money to wifey, see your old 1 year post eh
look, i don't need your money. if you want a prenup, fine come with one.
i will only take a cheating man's ALL (money and everything!!) you know, use your money to appease/comfort myself

michelin89 said it better and i agree.

No, this sis trick. I am not falling for it.

You want to foool me to marry you. Madam "Clean him out".

That is how one day I will wake up with your lawyer, at the foot of my bed, waiving a court order and with 6 six-foot-eight bodyguards/bailiffs bundling me out of my house with only my white pant while you are chewing gum and filing your nail non-chalantly.

Smart guy here:

[size=18pt]Simon Cowell accused of helping tycoon hide alleged £2bn fortune[/size]

Simon Cowell has been accused of helping a property tycoon secretly hide his alleged £2billion fortune during a bitter divorce case.

The X Factor boss was named alongside tycoon Sir Philip Green and Russian oligarch Boris Berezovksy as helping Scot Young keep his assets hidden.

Mr Young’s estranged wife, Michelle, made the sensational claim as she tried to force him to pay maintenance to her and their two teenage daughters, who have been evicted from their home. The 49-year-old businessman claims he is £28.5million in debt and has had no income since 2006.

When Mrs Young started reeling off the list of high-profile names involved in the alleged conspiracy, judge Mr Justice Mostyn, sitting at the High Court, warned her to be careful.   

But she insisted that her husband was ‘a secret major shareholder’ in American Idol, on which Mr Cowell worked.

Mrs Young, 47, added she had been told she ‘will never find out the truth because these people are wealthy and powerful’.

The hearing was convened to determine what had happened to Mr Young’s fortune, which stood at £400million in 2006 when the couple separated after 11 years of marriage.

He was ordered in 2009 to pay £27,500 a month in maintenance but he claims his fortune disappeared in a Russian investment project.

Philip Noble, representing Mrs Young, said: ‘He says he has £150 income a week, although he goes out to very expensive restaurants like Cipriani and The Ivy. He says he is reliant on his girlfriend, a part-time model in her 20s. She pays for everything.’

Mr Young, who lives in Knightsbridge, west London, insisted his estranged wife was a ‘fantasist’ and said he had met the X Factor judge fewer than five times.

A spokesman for Mr Cowell said the allegations were ‘utterly untrue’.

Dayokanu, you dey jot down tactics?

^^^hahahahaha smart guy indeed

Sagamite:

Smart guy here:

Dayokanu, you dey jot down tactics?

Abeg gimme the guy phone number.

havent I said the same thing here for a while.

If you own your company, Sell it to your brother or friend and just be an employee earning minimum wage while driving range rovers all over

and hopefully your friend/brother will also not swindle you at the end.

[size=18pt]Simon Cowell accused of helping tycoon hide his wealth from wife in bid to avoid divorce payout
[/size]

IT was a court drama as sensational as any of Simon Cowell’s television feasts…

The X Factor judge yesterday found himself at the centre of allegations he helped a property tycoon hide his true wealth from his ex-wife who was after maintenance for their two daughters.

Michelle Young claims he was one of three millionaires who aided Scot Young in keeping up to £2billion in assets secret from legal ­hearings. The other two, she claims, are Topshop owner Sir Philip Green and restaurant ­entrepreneur Richard Caring.

After astonishing exchanges between the estranged couple were played out at the High Court, furious Cowell said he would consider suing over the “utterly untrue” claims.

Mrs Young, 46, was asked by her 48-year-old husband, who is representing himself: “Who is hiding my assets?” She replied: “Sir Philip Green, Simon Cowell and Richard Caring.” She claims her husband was worth £400million when they split but is now worth £2billion. It is said she wants a £200million divorce payout. He insists he is broke, despite allegedly being spotted eating at top ­restaurants and driving a Ferrari.

Family Division judge Mr Justice Mostyn said to Mrs Young: “You say these people are helping him hide his money?” She replied: “Yes.” He asked if she was saying there was “a huge conspiracy to hide his assets”. She said: “Yes.”

Judge Mostyn warned her: “You have to be careful when you make allegations that well-known people have been involved in criminal conspiracy. Do you understand?” Mrs Young added: “Absolutely, my lord.” Asked whether she was suggesting those named were intending “to pervert and defeat the course of justice”, she replied: “Yes.”

Mrs Young said her husband was “a secret major ­shareholder” in Cowell’s American Idol.

Judge Mostyn: “Are they hiding other assets of significant value other than American Idol?”

Mrs Young: “Yes, but I am told I will never find out the truth because these people are powerful.” Cowell’s spokesman said last night: “These ­allegations are completely untrue and our lawyers are contacting Mrs Young about her ­statements.” The claims were made during a hearing to find out what happened to Mr Young’s riches.

He married Michelle at Chelsea register office in March 1995. They split in 2006 and she filed for divorce. He claims he has no cash to pay maintenance for their daughters Scarlett, 18, and 16-year-old Sasha and he has debts of £28.5million. Mr Young was made bankrupt by the taxman last year over a near £2million debt. He got a six-month suspended jail term for failing to reveal information about his assets. Mr Young lives with girlfriend Noelle Reno, a model and actress, in Knightsbridge. His wife is staying in a two-bed Westminster flat with her daughters. Her lawyer Philip Noble said a list of Mr Young’s assets had been found on a hard disk he tried to wipe.

Mr Noble told the court: “He says he has £150 income a week, although he goes out to very ­expensive restaurants like Cipriani and The Ivy.”

But Mr Young, a “fixer” for Russian oligarchs and British billionaires, accused his ex of being “a fantasist”. The hearing continues.

She wants £200m she did not earn and can never earn.

For 11 years of marriage and she was the one that asked for divorce?

Biatch!!!



Case back in 2009:

[size=18pt]Tycoon Scot Young faces jail in £400m divorce
[/size]

A fixer for the super-rich has just days to prove his claim that he has no money left

A secretive tycoon at the centre of one of Britain’s biggest divorce cases is facing jail over the whereabouts of his £400m fortune.

Scot Young, a “fixer” to Russian oligarchs and British billionaires, has been told that he could be imprisoned for failing to tell a High Court judge where his money has gone.

Details of the case can be made public for the first time after the judge made a special order last Wednesday allowing The Sunday Times to report on the hearing.

Until two months ago, the family courts were protected by secrecy, with the affairs of the rich and famous largely concealed from public view by antiquated laws.

The judge has ordered that Young’s passport be seized to stop him fleeing the country. “There is a real risk that he will leave the jurisdiction and not be seen again,” Mr Justice Charles told a hearing at the High Court last week.

Young now faces proceedings to commit him to jail this month unless he can account for the missing millions.

Young, 47, is a close friend of Sir Tom Hunter, the billionaire entrepreneur. Insiders said Hunter had helped contribute to the estimated £100,000 a year rent for the London home in Regent’s Park where Young’s estranged wife Michelle and the couple’s two teenage daughters, Scarlet, 16, and Sasha, 14, now live. He has also helped out with the girls’ school fees.

Young’s other friends include Boris Berezovsky, the Russian oligarch to whom he sold his family home for £19m, and Sir Philip Green, the billionaire retailer.

Despite his impeccable connections and his own rumoured millions, Young insists he is now penniless. Last week he was represented in court by a publicly funded lawyer.

Before their marriage ran into trouble three years ago, Young and his wife owned a succession of mansions. The £19m home he sold to Berezovsky was on Wentworth Park Estate in Egham, Surrey.

One millionaire acquaintance said: “Scot’s a fixer. He helps wealthy people. If someone needs a house, he’ll get them a house. If they need a nice car, he’ll get them a car. His main business was peddling expensive properties. He would live in them and then sell them on. He sometimes turned up in Boris’s office with plans of the latest house he was selling.”

Another acquaintance recalled how the Youngs enjoyed lavish holidays, which included at least one trip staying on board Hunter’s yacht in the Mediterranean.

“They only ever flew by private jet and at any one time they had £3m worth of cars parked in the driveway,” said a friend.

The couple met when Young was a rising property entrepreneur and Michelle was working in the retail industry.

They married at Chelsea register office in 1995. Their relationship broke down in 2006 and the couple began divorce proceedings with Michelle trying to get her share of her husband’s fortune.

Young claims the money has all gone. Sources said that was why Hunter had stepped in to help subsidise some of his family’s rent and school fees. At last week’s hearing, however, the judge said Young’s wife did not accept that her husband had lost his fortune.

She is claiming maintenance, pending her claim for up to half his assets.

Christian Kenny, her barrister, claimed that Young had failed to answer questions about the money and was now in contempt of court.

Philip Perrins, Young’s barrister, said the husband had had difficulty getting documents because several properties had been repossessed.

Mr Justice Charles said he was trying to find out how much the entrepreneur was now worth. “There is a £400m starting figure. I expect some documentation to show where it has all gone. There isn’t any at the moment,” he said.

Michelle Young has hired a team of former Scotland Yard detectives to establish what has happened to the money.

Sources close to the case said they were examining documents and computer files in which Young had apparently stored details of his business dealings.

Neither Young nor his wife would comment.

The guy got his friends to funnel money to take care of his kids but he is not releasing any money to fund the lifestyle of this biatch "because she is used to it".  


In 2010:

[size=18pt]Tycoon’s wife gives taxman secret files[/size]
The latest twist in a bitter £400m divorce battle threatens to cause jitters among a wealth circle

THE wife of the tycoon at the centre of a £400m divorce is to hand secret files on his dealings with the super-rich to the taxman.

Michelle Young, 45, who is divorcing her husband Scot, is to give HM Revenue & Customs a computer disk containing hundreds of pages of emails and other documents outlining his dealings in property, shares and film companies over the past five years.

The files were held on the hard drive of a laptop computer used by the tycoon. He believed he had deleted them before handing the laptop to his estranged wife to help their children Scarlet, 17, and Sasha, 15, study for exams.

She hired private detectives, including the former head of Scotland Yard’s computer crime unit, to examine the laptop and they recovered a large amount of encrypted material.

This weekend Scot Young, 48, said he had already been subjected to one Revenue inquiry that ended with him declaring himself bankrupt and owing £2m to the taxman. “I have nothing to hide. A copy of the hard drive is with my former lawyers and I’m happy to give that to the Revenue.”

The latest twist in the high-profile divorce battle will unnerve some of Scot Young’s friends, who have already told him privately they are unhappy with the publicity surrounding the case. The couple split up four years ago.

A fixer to Russian oligarchs and British billionaires, Young, whose assets were once estimated at £400m, claims he is broke after losing his fortune in a series of disastrous financial deals. The court has given him a six-month suspended jail sentence for failing to disclose full details of where this money has gone.

He insists that properties he has been linked to in a £100m portfolio have all been repossessed or sold.

Last December Mrs Justice Black awarded Michelle Young £27,500 a month in maintenance on top of rent and school fees for her daughters, conceding the sums would be seen by some as “exceptionally generous”. She pointed out that the family had become used to a “luxurious lifestyle”, however.

Scot Young has declined to provide a penny of the maintenance award.

In the past, Michelle Young and her children have received more than £1m from some of her estranged husband’s friends and business associates. There were direct or indirect contributions from Sir Philip Green, the boss of Topshop, and Harold Tillman, the chairman of Jaeger, the fashion chain.

Sir Tom Hunter provided £124,000 in rent and school fees. Richard Caring, the restaurateur, has paid £50,000 towards Scot Young’s legal fees.

Scot Young sold Boris Berezovsky, the oligarch, a family home on the Wentworth estate in Surrey for £19m in 2001. The files show that in 2004 he sold Berezovsky a London property estimated to be worth £4m for just £350,000. Scot Young said last week the price paid was the market value because the property had only a five-year lease.

The computer disk and other documents contain details of transactions involving the sale of 15 properties, including half a dozen mansions in Belgravia, central London.

The files also contain references to film investments. Scot Young discussed funding Manolete, a film about a Spanish bullfighter released in March, starring Adrien Brody and Penelope Cruz. He confirmed he did invest in one film company because associates told him it would be “tax-efficient”.

Other files include references to a technology firm called EU Smart, in which Green’s wife Tina held some shares.

Michelle Young said she and her daughters faced penury because she was unable to pay school fees or rent due this week on their three-bedroom house in St John’s Wood, London. “I have been humiliated. He has stolen the last three years of our lives. We are just living one day at a time. He is eating in the finest restaurants with beautiful young models while my girls don’t know their futures,” she said last week.  

She said she was now looking for “an angel investor” to help fund her case. The tycoon Vincent Tchenguiz has reportedly shown interest but has not yet committed any funds.

Sofia Moussaoui, Michelle Young’s solicitor, said the taxman had “a bottomless pit in terms of resources” to find out what had happened to her husband’s assets.

Young said he had only one girlfriend, Noelle Reno, the former fiancée of Matthew Mellon, heir to the banking fortune. He was “delighted” that the taxman or the trustee in bankruptcy would be “looking at this in a rational fashion, unlike my wife, who I believe is refusing to come to terms with the fact that we can no longer live a luxury lifestyle”. (Mate, frankly that statement was below the belt and spiteful after you hid the money. )

This guy should win "Man of the Decade" for his perseverence, sacrifice and refusal in not being milked.   And yet, found a way of taking care of his kids!

The guy is a genius and gutsy. He took jail on the chin but "he aint lerrin'go of his sweat".

^Interesting drama

.

I guess some people also dont know money has wings.

While you're daydreaming about how to swindle your baby mamas, you forget in this world, nothing is static. That includes money.

chaircover:

So if you "clever" guys have found ways round the laws on how to safeguard your money, why then are you spitting and choking on your tea and making a big fuss about the injustice of divorce settlements?   . . . . . A law that you have no intention of following?

So because some women wear trousers and tops that reveal their [sexy] arms despite some mooronic laws banning women wearing "men's clothes"/"apparels that show their hand", then women should not call for the reversal of the law?

Hmm, I see. 

tpiah!:

I guess some people also dont know money has wings.

While you're daydreaming about how to swindle your baby mamas, you forget in this world, nothing is static. That includes money.

Swindle? 


Women and Logic? 

This is what I have been experiencing on this thread:



No matter how much sense I make or how right I am, logic and women don't mix.

We have been in the cyclical "Yes" to the first 2 decision points since. Hence we are stuck in a loop. Maybe I need to stop making logical argument of my POV.

Abeg Saga, Dayo and OAM4J . . . .  Abeg make una let me hear word jare . . . .

As if any woman will actually want to share in your kobo kobo!   

^^Which kin kobo kobo? how many of you women will agree to marry us if na kobo kobo we get?

chaircover:

So if you "clever" guys have found ways round the laws on how to safeguard your money, why then are you spitting and choking on your tea and making a big fuss about the injustice of divorce settlements? . . . . . A law that you have no intention of following?

We can not keep quiet until the injustice is totally dealt with and again the not so "clever" ones need to learn.

OAM4J:

and hopefully your friend/brother will also not swindle you at the end.

Better for my brother to swindle me than for one useless woman to claim that she has to be compensated for the lifestyle she was already used to.

Anyway Sanponna still dey

See the biatch that wants £200m for 11 years of marriage.



By the time the smart guy drags this thing out, the daughters will be over 18 and he will not pay her a dime of that stewpid, overbloated £27K per month child maintenance.

^^
She no try at all o. Now I see why the ex husband no gree.

Bawss1:

^^
She no try at all o. Now I see why the ex husband no gree.

No mind am. Bloody retail woman wey want £200m she did not work for.

The bobo gave her £1m worth of jewelry for her 40th birthday, so you can imagine the amount of money and assets she would have obtained in the marriage but she wants to milk more than her fair share in divorce settlements.

ha!!! Saga!! with your flowchart and everything, the matter no dey tire you? o ga o!!!

carry on bruve

armyofone:

ha!!! Saga!! with your flowchart and everything, the matter no dey tire you? o ga o!!!

carry on bruve

Me, I am enjoying it o.

If there was ever any doubt in any of the so-called chivalrous men's mind that most women can't be rational and logical on issues especially divorce settlements, then that doubt should be gone in any guy that has a brain.

I, myself, am also learning new things. According to most women's logic, the only acceptable terms of divorce is when a woman is the one that wants the divorce with or without the guy doing any major thing wrong. If a man is the one that wants a divorce, that is not acceptable, he has to be punished and that should be under the law.

Also it is amazing that women can be offended about my fact that men select partners based on looks. That is somehow "shallow" and "offensive". 

Like if women don't choose their men mainly on height or intellect (what biological evolution dictates they should find the most attractive).

That is OK because women are the ones doing that, but when men are doing theirs? Abomination! Outrageous! Shallow! 

When a man wants a divorce, He is a jackass and must have to pay.

When a woman wants a divorce, The guy must have offended her badly and he must still pay

Reminds me of another recent women immunity to logic example I had about 3 months ago.

Historically, males in the UK have had to pay higher car insurance premium than females. For example, a twin of brother and sister that just recently passed their driving test and bought the same car, had the girl quoted about £1000 for insurance whilst the boy was quoted about £3000.

The logic behind it was that statistic shows that of the few that have accident, men are more likely to have an accident than women, the younger the higher the risk. The illogicality behind it is that all men should be financially penalised for this stats.

Recently, the European court over-ruled this and said men should not be discriminated against for plainly being men. Which meant that, inevitable, to maintain profitability, the insurance companies will have to increase women's insurance and decrease men's to comply with the law.

Of all the women I heard on TV or discuss with about the court ruling, they felt the ruling was wrong and rubbish. They felt it was OK for companies to make decisions that discriminate as long as it will affect their profits and the are doing it based on commercial decision to protect profits. That is was just plain, beautiful business sense that the insurance companies were practising.

Fortunately for those on TV, they were putting their opinions across to ediots that could not challenge their lame arguments. The ones in real life were unfortunate to be putting their opinion across to Sagamite, The Emperor of Logic. Pope of Objectivity. Ayatollah of Intelligence.

I asked them simply that since it was acceptable that businesses can discriminate against men to maintain or protect their profitability, then surely it must be OK and shouldn't be against the law (as it is) for a business to refuse to employ a young woman because she is likely to want to start having kids. Statistics will show (I have no shred of a doubt about this) that women are more likely to give birth and have to take time off work, the younger the higher the risk. So why should a business not protect its profitability by refusing to employ someone that down the line can start popping kids and then you will have to pay them money (maternity leave) you are not getting any commercial productivity (or contribution to profit) for, when you can easily hire a man with virtually zero risk?

Trust women! They refused to concede and continued arguing and refused to acknowledge the logical argument because they want to have things to their advantage at all times. They maintained that the court was wrong (men should be charged more for the higher risk) and it was right to protect women from employer discrimination and governments should force companies to pay maternity leave (ignore the women's risk).

To them that is fairness and equality. 

Women . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ||||| Thick Brick Wall |||||. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Logic