Skip to comments.Does Mel Gibson's wife deserve half his fortune? ($500 Million)
Posted on 04/15/2009 1:54:44 PM PDT by lewisglad
THREE cheers for feminism. With a desperate lack of anything worthwhile to aim their gunsights at, they turn on self-made billionaire Mel Gibson to support his estranged wife Robyn's demands for half his $US1 billion fortune.
The problem with absurd demands like this, underwritten by feminist approval, is that the girls always want it both ways.
For many years Robyn was prepared to remain at home as a loving wife. Retired as a dental nurse, supported by her husband.
Now, after the marriage has soured, Gibson has to pay for the life she apparently "gave up" to run their home, slave over a stove, and clean and raise their kids so he could make their millions.
I'm confused. Does that mean the traditional homemaking duties are not acts of love but merely bargaining chips in case of an iceberg down the line?
Over 28 years her claim for $500,000,000 works out at $4879 a day. Or $34,153 a week.
To argue that they are living in California, entitling her to half the fortune under California law, is once again more evidence of wanting it both ways.
It penalises Gibson for once having faith in his marriage and believing it would last.
Imagine the outcry if he had insisted on a pre-nup, to be applied retroactively, when they moved to California.
For years Gibson has taken the bullets that are a by-product of his fortune - privacy invasions, critical attacks, slander.
It entitles Gibson to keep the greater share of his wealth, a fortune amassed through his own creative genius.
Only a handful of people in the world have the talent to do what he does.
The argument that without Robyn's support he would never have succeeded is just desperate. The truer argument is that talent finds a way.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.com.au ...
No, and he does not server half of hers either
Yes. She was there supporting him in whatever he did...plus she put up with him!
I suspect only God knows what you're talking about.
I have no problems with her getting half of the money, but a legitimate reason must be had.
I would rather they simply reconcile.
What difference does it make? It’s the law.
(For the record, I think she deserves half just as much as he does.)
What a stupid article. Marriage is a contract where each partner holds a 50% stake. You want out, you gotta buy the other’s 50% stake.
Simple easy peasy.
and now for the other side of the story... GIVE HER HALF
By Holly Byrnes
AS MOST paid-up members of the sisterhood will tell you, any woman who wants to be equal to a man lacks ambition.
So Mel Gibson’s wife Robyn, partner of 28 years and mother to his seven children, wants half the fortune he earned while they were happily married?
Californian law says she’s entitled to that as a minimum and I would argue if rumours of his philandering prove true then hitting him where it hurts - the hip pocket - is the least she can do.
This woman is no gold digger who has calculated her future earnings based on how many hours are left in his oxygen tank, Anna Nicole Smith-style.
This is the woman who took a chance on him when he was a struggling actor.
A recent biography revealed Mel earned the sum total of $6000 for his first film role in Attack Force Z.
Back then, Robyn Moore was Gibson’s girlfriend, an Adelaide dental nurse but, more significantly, his meal ticket.
Their 1980 wedding at a Forestville church was an intimate affair, with one newspaper at the time suggesting this was done deliberately so Mel could limit details of his private life and preserve the myth of him as an eligible sex symbol.
When he finally made it big, Robyn remained in his shadow as her husband took his comfortable - and ultimately profitable - place in the spotlight.
With the danger money Robyn has earned over the years wrangling the ego of the 1985 Sexiest Man Alive, not to mention living with an alcoholic, she deserves her half share - and a bloody medal.
To question whether she is entitled to those earnings because she didn’t star in the movies that made the millions is to deny her and every other supportive spouse without a “real” job their dues.
It’s the same reprehensible argument Greg Norman offered the mother of his two children and wife of 25 years Laura when he claimed she had a limited claim to his $300 million golfing fortune because “the wife didn’t teach him how to win”.
Oh, to have a golf club and five minutes with that Great White Choker.
The Greg Normans and knuckle-grazers of this world who believe this little woman should be grateful for the years Mel invested in her and go quietly, a token million or so in hand, should all crawl back under the rock they came from.
Lucky for Robyn, Mel is a good Catholic boy who can be trusted to show the woman he called the “saint” in his life a little more respect.
And the money.
Yes. If he had faith that his marriage would last, so did she. But pictures of him making out with another woman at one of their homes kind of negates her faith in him. She was there in the beginning, she had faith in his career, stood beside him through his alcoholic phase, bore him 6 children and played both mom and dad while he was away on set making movies. She’s been there for him for 28 years though it all. He’s the one that screwed this up, not her.
Depends on what she does with the money. If they get along after the divorce she might want to invest in some of Mels projects. I expect that is what he will do with his money. You don’t need 400 million to live on the rest of his actuarial life so if he has some projects in mind I bet he’ll pursue them. It’s hard enough to get a divorce without it being all over the Tabloids so I wish them both luck. 28 years is a long time to live with someone you find you don’t love.
I hope Mel and his wife are just going to divide the property and go on their way and not drag this out and use it as a way to humiliate and harass each other.
For 28 years? She was with him before he was famous?
Yes, she deserves half. She didn’t cheat, he did.
If the failure of the marriage is indeed primarily his fault, he should count himself lucky to get away with losing only half of the money.
The beauty of this argument is that it can never be proven. You might as well just say that Mr. Gibson would be worth $2 billion today "were it not for his wife." How could you ever know?
He cheated on her, in public. Canoodling on the beach in Costa Rica, at THEIR HOME they have there.
Pretty legitimate reason if you ask me.
Risk my life with AIDS from some skanky broad less than half his age? Uh yeah, I’d deserve half too.
Absolutely she does. I am a huge fan of Mel Gibson, but he is a flawed man (like all of us) and has allowed his flaws to damage his marriage time after time.
I’m sure this wasn’t an easy decision for her, but she has been a devoted wife who has stood by him through his ups and downs and has raised his children and kept his home for 28 years.
She deserves more than half, she deserves a husband who kept his vows and cherished her and loved her until natural death took one of them. Since she has to settle for less than that, one half of the monetary wealth of their household will have to suffice.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.