Die Sängerin Adele lässt sich von ihrem Ehemann Simon Konecki scheiden und muss ihm einen hohen Betrag zahlen.
If you’re reading this then you’ve probably heard about Adele’s $140 million divorce split. Adele has an estimated net worth of $190 million but now has to pay $140 million to her ex-husband. Just because she has an estimated net worth of $190 million doesn’t mean this is the cash she has on hand. The singer recently sold the marital home for $3 million which sounds like a lot of money but she sold the home at a loss.
140 Millionen Dollar sind sicherlich eine stolze Summe. In der Wikipedia heißt es zu ihrer Beziehung bzw Ehe:
Adele began dating charity entrepreneur and Old Etonian Simon Konecki in the summer of 2011. In June 2012, Adele announced that she and Konecki were expecting a child. Their son Angelo was born on 19 October 2012. On the topic of becoming a parent, Adele observed that she „felt like I was truly living. I had a purpose, where before I didn’t“. Adele and Konecki brought a privacy case against a UK-based photo agency that published intrusive paparazzi images of their son taken during family outings in 2013. Lawyers working on their behalf accepted damages from the company in July 2014. Adele has also stated that she has suffered from postnatal depression, generalized anxiety disorder, and panic attacks.
In early 2017, tabloids started speculating that Adele and Konecki had secretly married when they were spotted wearing matching rings on their ring fingers. During her acceptance speech at the 59th Annual Grammy Awards for Album of the Year, Adele confirmed these reports of their marriage by calling Konecki her husband when thanking him. She repeated this in March 2017, telling the audience at a concert in Brisbane, Australia, „I’m married now“. Adele became a stay-at-home mother. In April 2019, Adele’s representatives announced to the Associated Press that she and Konecki had separated after more than seven years together, but that they would continue to raise their son together. On 13 September 2019, it was reported that Adele had filed for divorce from Konecki in the United States.
Wenn sie 2017 geheiratet haben, dann hat sich die Ehe für ihn dann tatsächlich gelohnt. Nach den Scheidungspapieren sollen sie wohl sogar erst 2018 geheiratet haben.
Aber weiter in dem Artikel:
On April 8, 2020, Katherine Singh from Flare published a piece about Adele’s divorce and how the author didn’t like what happened. You don’t need to read the piece to get the gist of what Singh’s angle was. At the very top of the article, you’ll find the words, “This isn’t what women meant when they demanded gender parity.” An obvious question is, “if this person is proclaiming to answer for all women then maybe she could tell us what women wanted?” If this isn’t what women wanted then perhaps there should be more women protesting unfair and often illegal practices by Family Courts. Singh is a self-described feminist. The modern-day feminist ideology has members who preach about men cutting off access to power and wealth that men have always enjoyed. Wouldn’t it be fair to assume that the lack of protesting from at least a sizable amount of American women be a potent symbol that women know the Family Courts are biased in their favor?
Das Scheidungsrecht in den USA ist meines Wissens nach je nach Bundesstaat unterschiedlich, sieht aber wohl in einigen Bundesländern vor, dass das bei der Scheidung vorhandene Vermögen zu teilen ist, also nicht nur das dazugewonnene Vermögen wie im deutschen gesetzlichen Zustand der Zugewinngemeinschaft, sondern alles Vermögen, egal ob man es innerhalb der Ehe erworben hat oder es bereits hatte. Wie sich eine solche Regelung halten kann ist mir ein Rätsel. Sie ist natürlich über Eheverträge änderbar, aber sei produziert ja gerade bei Ehen, bei denen vorher Vermögen auf einer Seite vorhanden war und die dann nur kurz halten, erkennbare Ungerechtigkeiten.
Aber in der Tat ist es unbillig darüber nur zu jammern, wenn es eine Frau trifft.
Entweder es ist ungerecht an sich, für beide Geschlechter, oder es ist nicht ungerecht.
No, this isn’t unprecedented. This happens rather often. Men have been the majority of the people who have suffered at the hands of Family Courts across the country with several deceptive and often illegal tactics utilized to stack the odds against them to deny visitation with children, payment of excessive child support, court fees, attorney fees and sometimes for several attorneys, and guardian-ad-litem fees. While people shouldn’t use this as a “gotcha” moment it should be a moment for reflection. If someone is upset with the idea of Adele having to pay her ex-husband $150 million when she is only worth $190 million then that person should ask themselves, “by what principles am I upset?” Should a person be upset that this is happening to a person at all or that it’s happening to a woman? Where was Katherine Singh and all the people detesting this Family Court ruling when it was happening to men in the United States?
The reason why Adele’s struggles fall on deaf ears to some men is that while this sort of stuff was happening to men a lot of people justified it.
In der Tat: Die Forderung kann dann nur sein ein moderneres Eherecht zu fordern. Angesichts des Umstandes, dass Frauen heute natürlich ihr eigenes Geld verdienen können und Ehen nicht mehr für die Ewigkeit geschlossen werden, erscheint das überfällig.
Es werden dann noch einige sehr teure Scheidungen von Männern, etwa Paul McCartney angesprochen, bei den es den Aufschrei eben weitaus weniger gab, obwohl in diesen Scheidungen enorme Beträge zu zahlen waren.
Und es werden Fälle wie der von Mark Roesler dargestellt:
Where was the outrage for Mark Roesler? South Carolina Family Court Judge Rochelle Conits granted Roesler a divorce from his then-wife Sarah Roesler. The divorce was granted based on the wife’s physical cruelty. Here is a quote directly from Mark Roesler’s appeal to the South Carolina Court of Appeals: “Shortly thereafter, a dispute arose between Husband and Wife over money and whether they were able to afford the Greer house. Wife began hitting and slapping Husband. Husband left the hotel and Wife followed. As Husband attempted to leave the parking lot in his car, Wife used her car to push Husband’s car approximately six feet onto the curb to prevent him from leaving. Wife exited her vehicle and began tossing items from Husband’s trunk.”
One would think that a judge who concedes that a wife is physically cruel wouldn’t grant custody of both children to the wife and make the abused combat veteran pay $4000 a month in child support. That person who believed a judge wouldn’t do such a thing would be wrong. That’s exactly what Judge Conits did. Mark Roesler appealed Judge Conit’s decision where something questionable was revealed. Judge Conits based the child support payments on Mark Roesler’s combat pay during a tour of duty but Mark Roesler was no longer in the military. How can a judge base child support payments based on combat pay that a combat veteran is no longer receiving?
Es wird auch dargestellt, dass die Richter bei Frauen üblicherweise großzügiger entscheiden, ihnen eher Geld und auch eher die Kinder zusprechen.
In conclusion, if it is outrageous for one gender then it is outrageous for all genders. Adele is a victim of predatory and often immoral Family Court practices. It’s good to see that there are women who are protesting against this harsh and tyrannical treatment. Suppose that every man was convinced that the gender wage gap was real. How would women ever rise up to make as much as their male counterparts and risk getting married when there is a real threat of them becoming like Adele? It would appear that things are changing and now that some people who haven’t experienced Family Court nonsense gender equality is suddenly a trend. Some could say that the men who have experienced family court would have one message to their newfound women allies and that message is, “welcome, glad to see you’ve noticed.”
In der Tat kann man nur darauf hinweisen, dass dann eben das Eherecht für alle geändert werden muss. Aber dafür werden sich viele Frauen eben auch nicht begeistern können, denn es nimmt ihnen erhebliche Vorteile, wenn sie eben diejenigen sind die die Kinder betreuen und wenig arbeiten. Im gegenwärtigen System schreckt es Männer ab, sich scheiden zu lassen und lässt (überwiegend) Frauen an den Erfolgen der Männer teilhaben, was durchaus interessanter sein kann als selbst Karriere zu machen.