There’s a big hubbub about Halle Berry having to pay child support to her baby daddy Gabriel Aubry. Feminists complaining that it’s not fair that Halle has to pay Gabriel $16,000 a month in child support.
I don’t see what the big deal is. The system works in this case.
Child Support is based on the income of the parents. The one who makes more usually has to pay to make up the difference of the spouse who makes less to maintain the child’s lifestyle. Since Halle makes MORE than Gabriel Aubry, she legally has an obligation to pay MORE child support to maintain Nahla’s lifestyle.
Then there are those feminists who would complain about it not being right for a man to take money from a woman.
Er…Aren’t the courts supposed to be gender neutral? And aren’t judges supposed to follow the law? The law clearly states that the spouse who makes more than the other has to pay child support to maintain the child’s lifestyle.
Child support laws don’t say anything about men or women. Nor do they say anything about it being wrong for a man to take money from his wife to take care of his children when they come to visit him.
And then there are those Black feminists who want to make this a race issue. It’s not. Let’s take a look at Britney Spears who is in a similar situation. Her ex-husband Kevin Federline has custody of the kids. Britney Spears has been paying Child support in the six and seven figure range for YEARS.
But I find it odd no one wants to complain about Britney. Or the system being unfair in her case.
I just love all these DOUBLE STANDARDS here. It’s okay for a man to pay a woman child support when he makes MORE, but when the woman makes MORE and has to pay a MAN chid support, the system is unfair.
Ironic how SEXIST feminists can be when the system is made TRULY FAIR and JUST.
Gabriel Aubry is not a MAN for wanting to make sure his daughter is NOT taken care of. Doesn’t a responsible FATHER want the money to maintain his daughter’s lifestyle when he visits her? Doesn’t it show that he CARES enough to provide her with the equal economic resources at his home that she has with her mother?
Ironic how Feminists want to hate him for doing exactly what a MAN would do.
Here’s the deal: Halle Berry is not a VICTIM. She created this dysfunctional situation.
There are numerous reports stating Halle Berry wanted a baby BEFORE she got involved with Gabriel Aubry. And she wanted a baby on HER TERMS. Unfortunately, Gabriel decided her terms weren’t working out for him. Now Mr. Aubry tried to work things out with Ms. Berry amicably outside of the courts. However, because she was being a BULLY, he was FORCED to take legal action.
With the courts being about the LAW, the judge made his child support order based on the FACTS presented to them.
Those facts are that Halle Maria Berry makes more than Gabriel Aubry. In this case SHE has to pay child support.
Now she wouldn’t have to pay child support if she didn’t decide to have a child with Mr. Aubry. Again, she set these terms up BEFORE she got involved with Mr. Aubry. And this is why she has to pay child support.
To rephrase Judge Judith Sheindlin: SHE PICKED HIM to father her child.
Seriously, If Halle Berry is a victim of an unjust court system, then Britney Spears is a victim of an unjust court system. Now I know AmeriKKKa’s court system isn’t fair in most cases like Trayvon Martin, but in this case the judge followed the law to the letter. Halle Berry can’t claim she’s being victimized by the court system when she created the situation that is leading to her having to pay child support. She wanted to be the MAN in the relationship and now she’s getting treated like one. It is what it is.
I don’t see what the big deal is. The system works in this case.
Child Support is based on the income of the parents. The one who makes more usually has to pay to make up the difference of the spouse who makes less to maintain the child’s lifestyle. Since Halle makes MORE than Gabriel Aubry, she legally has an obligation to pay MORE child support to maintain Nahla’s lifestyle.
Then there are those feminists who would complain about it not being right for a man to take money from a woman.
Er…Aren’t the courts supposed to be gender neutral? And aren’t judges supposed to follow the law? The law clearly states that the spouse who makes more than the other has to pay child support to maintain the child’s lifestyle.
Child support laws don’t say anything about men or women. Nor do they say anything about it being wrong for a man to take money from his wife to take care of his children when they come to visit him.
And then there are those Black feminists who want to make this a race issue. It’s not. Let’s take a look at Britney Spears who is in a similar situation. Her ex-husband Kevin Federline has custody of the kids. Britney Spears has been paying Child support in the six and seven figure range for YEARS.
But I find it odd no one wants to complain about Britney. Or the system being unfair in her case.
I just love all these DOUBLE STANDARDS here. It’s okay for a man to pay a woman child support when he makes MORE, but when the woman makes MORE and has to pay a MAN chid support, the system is unfair.
Ironic how SEXIST feminists can be when the system is made TRULY FAIR and JUST.
Gabriel Aubry is not a MAN for wanting to make sure his daughter is NOT taken care of. Doesn’t a responsible FATHER want the money to maintain his daughter’s lifestyle when he visits her? Doesn’t it show that he CARES enough to provide her with the equal economic resources at his home that she has with her mother?
Ironic how Feminists want to hate him for doing exactly what a MAN would do.
Here’s the deal: Halle Berry is not a VICTIM. She created this dysfunctional situation.
There are numerous reports stating Halle Berry wanted a baby BEFORE she got involved with Gabriel Aubry. And she wanted a baby on HER TERMS. Unfortunately, Gabriel decided her terms weren’t working out for him. Now Mr. Aubry tried to work things out with Ms. Berry amicably outside of the courts. However, because she was being a BULLY, he was FORCED to take legal action.
With the courts being about the LAW, the judge made his child support order based on the FACTS presented to them.
Those facts are that Halle Maria Berry makes more than Gabriel Aubry. In this case SHE has to pay child support.
Now she wouldn’t have to pay child support if she didn’t decide to have a child with Mr. Aubry. Again, she set these terms up BEFORE she got involved with Mr. Aubry. And this is why she has to pay child support.
To rephrase Judge Judith Sheindlin: SHE PICKED HIM to father her child.
Seriously, If Halle Berry is a victim of an unjust court system, then Britney Spears is a victim of an unjust court system. Now I know AmeriKKKa’s court system isn’t fair in most cases like Trayvon Martin, but in this case the judge followed the law to the letter. Halle Berry can’t claim she’s being victimized by the court system when she created the situation that is leading to her having to pay child support. She wanted to be the MAN in the relationship and now she’s getting treated like one. It is what it is.
It looks like one of the comments on another post seem to agree with many of the points that you made.
ReplyDeletehttp://pjmedia.com/drhelen/2014/06/10/halle-berry-to-pay-child-support-of-16000-a-month/
What happened to your post on black women being washed up?
ReplyDeleteAd, Seems like like minds think alike.
ReplyDeleteAnoymous, here's the link to BEWARE THE WASHED UP BLACK WOMAN: http://shawnsjames.blogspot.com/2012/06/beware-washed-up-black-woman.html
Shawn, you are very spot on with your article. Based on the info that has been thrown out to the press, think the ruling is justified what others think.
ReplyDeleteThe bottom line, Judge Gordon ruled in Aubry's favor for Berry running her mouth and not having an agreement in place.
She probably didn't think she needed nor did she probably think he'd stay around, ignorance is bliss, huh?
Don't cry for me, Halle Berry.
posted at 7:55 am not 4:55 am
ReplyDelete1. You clearly don't know what feminism or what a feminist is.
ReplyDelete2. The reason this is a problem for many is because they have joint custody. In other words, she is paying him to do what he's supposed to do (be a parent/support and spend time with his child). There really shouldn't even be a discussion of child support when you share custody evenly, whether it's the man or woman. I take care of the kid when the kid's with me. You take care of the kid when the kid's with you. Period. This guy's a bum.
3. Britney is NOT in a similar situation; her ex actually has primary custody so yeah, we expect her to have to pay. He's still a bum and probably pocketing a lot of that money but ethically & legally, yes she should be paying child support. There is no "double standard".
I smell hypocrisy though. Something tells me if this were the other way around, you'd be whining about how unfair it was for HIM to have to pay HER anything.
This isn't about whether or not he's a bum, it's about equal protection under the law.
ReplyDeleteUmm, yeah that's actually EXACTLY what it boils down to. Britney's ex had full custody/responsibility so he should have gotten support. Halle's only has partial and should NOT be paid for doing what he's supposed to do as a father which is caring AND providing for his child. If you can't provide for the child while she is with YOU under YOUR care then you need to get a better paying job.
As a humanities major, I can tell you that the era of feminism as it currently exists has nothing to do with race or even sex. It IS clear you don't understand feminism to those who have actually studied postmodern feminism. You rely on faulty opinions you form instead of research and scholarly works to make your statements. Guess what? People who don't agree with you aren't automatically wrong. They may actually know more about the subject than you, especially since you provide no documentable research other than what you pick upon the streets. This makes you guilty of the same academic laziness of which you accuse others.
ReplyDeleteYou put all these words together to sound articulate, but distill the essence of your arguments and they sound no more intelligent or lofty than the common dude on the corner, spouting off about injustice from the streets.
And before you dismiss my education, difference of opinion, or right to think, remember we all can learn from others. All knowledge does not spring forth from the font of Saint James.
And if you notice, your most explosive rants happen when someone educated challenges you on your blog. You go into all your "Manginas" and "Bitch Mades" and "Simps" mud - slinging, because that is intelligent debate for Shawn James. How is your tendency to name call when you don't get your way different from those who do it in the streets?
ReplyDeleteLet me get this straight...Are you a humanities major or a Creative writing major?
ReplyDeleteI understand feminism destroyed the Black community. And led to the establishment of the Welfare state.
I understand it is a White female social construct designed by White lesbians and promotes White female supremacy.
I never said I was a scholar. That was you. I guess you think highly of me.
You can disagree with my points but I can choose to rebut them. For all your ad-hominems you have not presented an argument to articulate your points All of what you have written is emotional ranting.
And what does this have to do with Halle Berry, America's favorite bedwench?
Funny how you complain about me writing about single moms but won't go to the Real men avoid single mothers blog. I guess you're afraid of getting ROASTED by all the men on there.
From your posts it's clear to me you may be educated, but not very SMART.