Tiger Woods "Transgressions" Thread - Golfin' Ain't Easy

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

The only one I've actually heard of is Tiger's, and a google search only gives me some pretty wildly varying numbers. She takes 100 million out of 600, according to one source. Or she takes 250 million out of a billion dollar fortune according to another.

Isn't marriage supposed to be a partnerhsip? Taking one sixth or a quarter out of a marriage doesn't seem crazy to me, no matter how much money is involved.

Kobe and his wife apparently are not getting divorced after all.

Anyway, I've got a question for everyone. All this "whore" business got me thinking. What if it was the other way around?

Take a famous woman -- Gwen Stefani, for example. She's gotta be worth a fortune. Not Tiger-rich, but she's got a pretty big pile. She's been married for years, they've got kids, he was even kind of famous in his own right, but she obviously is the breadwinner.

So, tomorrow it comes out that all the while she's been married, she's been screwing the pool guy, the private chef, the waiter at the Hard Rock, her personal trainer, a Chippendale's dancer, and about 15 other dudes all over the country while she's on tour.

Now, it's time for a divorce. The question is, which one is the whore in this situation? Is she the whore, or is her husband?

Going by some of the "logic" we've seen in this thread, her husband is indeed the whore. He's a gold-digging whore. A bitch. He hasn't been putting out. He's been planning this all along.

In exactly the same situation, would you call the man a whore because his wife cheated on him? Of course not. Because it doesn't make sense. It's stupid.

Nobody would call the husband in this situation any of those things. If the guy happens to walk away from the divorce with 50 million dollars and the family home in Malibu, we wouldn't call him a whore or a slut. We'd probably call him "the guy who gets all the high fives".

The cheating wife would no doubt be called the whore. At least then it would make sense.

Some might think that; I personally feel that any divorce settlement that goes beyond attending to the needs of children involved is asinine. You have to take care of your kids. You dont have to take care of an ex.

The reason a man might receive more credit in a triumphant court case like that isn't because he's a man and it's acceptable behaviour, it would be because it happens so disproportionately. If both sides got routinely screwed, then there'd probably be a more prevalent movement to reform divorce law.

Furthermore, cheating doesn't make a woman a whore. When women cheat, there's a real issue in their relationship. It's often not the case with men, because the biology is different. There's a reason women statistically don't bail on guys the second they find out he's cheated, but men do. Sleeping with anyone for a reason that isnt 'i like this person' makes you a whore, male or female.

Finally, I should say that my primary intention posting that video was to get some people to laugh, and maybe throw a few new fans Bill Burr's way. My subsequent responses to you have all been motivated by you calling one of the rising titans of comedy unfunny. Sexist dick, of course. It's part of his persona. His comedy may not be for you; bill burr is ####ing hilarious.

[Ark2]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

The only one I've actually heard of is Tiger's, and a google search only gives me some pretty wildly varying numbers. She takes 100 million out of 600, according to one source. Or she takes 250 million out of a billion dollar fortune according to another.

Isn't marriage supposed to be a partnerhsip? Taking one sixth or a quarter out of a marriage doesn't seem crazy to me, no matter how much money is involved.

Kobe and his wife apparently are not getting divorced after all.

Anyway, I've got a question for everyone. All this "whore" business got me thinking. What if it was the other way around?

Take a famous woman -- Gwen Stefani, for example. She's gotta be worth a fortune. Not Tiger-rich, but she's got a pretty big pile. She's been married for years, they've got kids, he was even kind of famous in his own right, but she obviously is the breadwinner.

So, tomorrow it comes out that all the while she's been married, she's been screwing the pool guy, the private chef, the waiter at the Hard Rock, her personal trainer, a Chippendale's dancer, and about 15 other dudes all over the country while she's on tour.

Now, it's time for a divorce. The question is, which one is the whore in this situation? Is she the whore, or is her husband?

Going by some of the "logic" we've seen in this thread, her husband is indeed the whore. He's a gold-digging whore. A bitch. He hasn't been putting out. He's been planning this all along.

In exactly the same situation, would you call the man a whore because his wife cheated on him? Of course not. Because it doesn't make sense. It's stupid.

Nobody would call the husband in this situation any of those things. If the guy happens to walk away from the divorce with 50 million dollars and the family home in Malibu, we wouldn't call him a whore or a slut. We'd probably call him "the guy who gets all the high fives".

The cheating wife would no doubt be called the whore. At least then it would make sense.

See, if you couldn't be bothered to watch the video, then you should not make comments about it. The "whores" that he was referring to were the women that he had an affair with, not the wives. So in your scenario,the whores would be the pool guy, the private chef, the waiter at the Hard Rock, her personal trainer, the Chippendale's dancer, and the 15 other dudes all over the country while she's on tour.

And to be fair, no, I don't think that Gwen's husband should be entitled to half of her money, although his estate is likely a lot closer to hers than you may think.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Ark2

See, if you couldn't be bothered to watch the video, then you should not make comments about it. The "whores" that he was referring to were the women that he had an affair with, not the wives. So in your scenario,the whores would be the pool guy, the private chef, the waiter at the Hard Rock, her personal trainer, the Chippendale's dancer, and the 15 other dudes all over the country while she's on tour.

And to be fair, no, I don't think that Gwen's husband should be entitled to half of her money, although his estate is likely a lot closer to hers than you may think.

In the end I did watch the whole thing. I actually thought the Arnold stuff was funny.

As for "he didn't mean the wives", I disagree. "There is an epidemic of gold digging whores... Kobe's wife is going to get 75 million bucks... she can't even make a layup".

That not saying she's a gold-digger?

The husbands are "great men" who have been "cut in half". Cut in half by who? What is he referring to there? Divorce settlements, that's what he's referring too. All those women Tiger cheated with aren't getting a divorce settlement. They get nothing. His wife, a "babysitter", gets the dough. She's the one getting the gold. He's not talking about her? Of course he is.

Anyway, this has turned into nitpickery about a comedian I'd never heard of (despite his "rising titan" status). I've sidetracked it and I'm tired of it.

There is a long tradition of risky, edgy, sexist, even racist comedian, and I've laughed at plenty of 'em. This guy wasn't one of them. If folks out there like him, fill your boots. Nobody has to defend him to me.

[return to the red]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

I think a lot of people here don't understand what marriage is. It's giving up everything to become a family unit with someone. That means sharing everything (unless you have a prenup). That's more than just money, it means you put their needs/desires ahead of your own.

If they split, she isn't getting half of his money, she is getting half of their money.

Oh yes, because when someone gets married to someone that comes into the marriage with nothing but a ####ty old car, no house and leaves the marriage after a year and takes a settlement that's equal to 2 years of her annual salary, yes that's sounds like a good idea of marriage.

[jhunt223]

Effin white knights.... jesus

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by T@T

My Answer:

If the women didn't have anything to do with making the money then all of them.

.

Is your answer the same if we replace ubber-rich golfer with guy that works in the Walmart Warehouse?

[FanIn80]

All I can say is he's now officially back on top as the world's #1 ranked golfer.

...and that I don't give a rat's ass about any of the other crap.

http://www.tsn.ca/golf/story/?id=419080

[T@T]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

Is your answer the same if we replace ubber-rich golfer with guy that works in the Walmart Warehouse?

It's the gold diggers that piss me off,they know damn well if they give a few years to a rich guy they'll be set for life.

A few years ago at a barbecue I met this girl who was recently divorced and the more she drank the more she opened up,she said she was never attracted physically to her husband,I asked "why marry him"?

Her answer: I don't like to work! with a twinkle in her eye.

Turns out she got a house in Rosedale, $1.4m and $8k a month in support,all for 4.5 years of her important life and popping out a kid.

She was a freaking hairdresser when she met him.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by T@T

It's the gold diggers that piss me off,they know damn well if they give a few years to a rich guy they'll be set for life.

A few years ago at a barbecue I met this girl who was recently divorced and the more she drank the more she opened up,she said she was never attracted physically to her husband,I asked "why marry him"?

Her answer: I don't like to work! with a twinkle in her eye.

Turns out she got a house in Rosedale, $1.4m and $8k a month in support,all for 4.5 years of her important life and popping out a kid.

She was a freaking hairdresser when she met him.

So it is the amounts and not the concept that bothers you. If they are "working poor" then it is fine.

[nfotiu]

Originally Posted by T@T

It's the gold diggers that piss me off,they know damn well if they give a few years to a rich guy they'll be set for life.

A few years ago at a barbecue I met this girl who was recently divorced and the more she drank the more she opened up,she said she was never attracted physically to her husband,I asked "why marry him"?

Her answer: I don't like to work! with a twinkle in her eye.

Turns out she got a house in Rosedale, $1.4m and $8k a month in support,all for 4.5 years of her important life and popping out a kid.

She was a freaking hairdresser when she met him.

Meh, that's on the guy too. He tries to use his wealth and status to get his trophy wife, he shouldn't be surprised when that is all she wanted him for.

[FireFly]

Women trade looks for money, men trade brains for looks. You don't have to trade anything if you don't want but if you're a 5 looking for a wife that's a 10, you'd better have a giant penis or something else to offer her....

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by FireFly

Women trade looks for money, men trade brains for looks. You don't have to trade anything if you don't want but if you're a 5 looking for a wife that's a 10, you'd better have a giant penis or something else to offer her....

oh now your avatar makes sense....

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by FanIn80

All I can say is he's now officially back on top as the world's #1 ranked golfer.

...and that I don't give a rat's ass about any of the other crap.

http://www.tsn.ca/golf/story/?id=419080

Well then it appear you're in the wrong thread. Being back on top isn't a transgression.

[T@T]

Originally Posted by flameswin

Well then it appear you're in the wrong thread. Being back on top isn't a transgression.

Take a look back in this thread,"he'll never be the same", "he'll never be on top again" type comments.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by T@T

Take a look back in this thread,"he'll never be the same", "he'll never be on top again" type comments.

Oh, I hadn't actually opened the thread until a couple of pages ago when it got bumped.

[CaramonLS]

Originally Posted by nfotiu

Meh, that's on the guy too. He tries to use his wealth and status to get his trophy wife, he shouldn't be surprised when that is all she wanted him for.

Wow, this argument is roughly akin to "She was wearing a skirt, so no wonder she got raped".

[Boblobla]

Originally Posted by CaramonLS

Wow, this argument is roughly akin to "She was wearing a skirt, so no wonder she got raped".

Really? Having no surprise that a trophy wife is in it for the money is akin to blaming a rape victim? #### me. Wow.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by CaramonLS

Wow, this argument is roughly akin to "She was wearing a skirt, so no wonder she got raped".

Actually no, it's absolutely not even close to that.

[CaramonLS]

Originally Posted by valo403

Actually no, it's absolutely not even close to that.

In both cases you are blaming the victim for things that are out of their control, but using a scapegoat (skirt, being rich, etc) as the determining factor in your reasoning.

It's a load of garbage.

Saying someone should have 'known better' for marrying a person who is attractive isn't remotely fair.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by CaramonLS

In both cases you are blaming the victim for things that are out of their control, but using a scapegoat (skirt, being rich, etc) as the determining factor in your reasoning.

It's a load of garbage.

Saying someone should have 'known better' for marrying a person who is attractive isn't remotely fair.

Since when is making a conscious and informed decision on marrying someone out of your control?