An Australian man has explained that when he discovered his wife had "deformed" nipples — which he only discovered two years after they got married in 1972 because it took that long before he saw her undressed — that was when he knew he wanted out of the marriage, but he stayed with her out of a sense of duty, and they proceeded to have 3 children together before finally separating in 2011. But for the sake of deciding how to divide up joint assets, he feels the marriage should be considered to have ended in 1974, at the moment of the nipple disfigurement discovery. The judge, however, didn't buy the argument. [stuff.co.nz
1935: Mary Ann and Fred Cordes weren't doing too well with their marriage. But instead of just getting a divorce, like normal people, they (well, it was mostly Mary Ann's idea) hatched a plan to sell Fred for $1500 to any woman willing to buy him. Mary Ann hoped to use the money to travel to Ireland, her childhood home.
I don't know how their plan turned out. It's one of those stories that never got a follow-up in the press. But I can't imagine women were lining up to pay $1500 to acquire "all the rights" to a 40-year-old unemployed ice-cream maker.
- Aug 26, 1935
The Brooklyn Daily Eagle - Aug 14, 1935
Married for 30 years, this poor woman became a widow in February 2011. But wait, did I say widow? Not so much, as her husband secretly divorced
her 8 years before. Then he continued to live with her as always but upon his death she was left with nothing. The man's grown children from a previous marriage are fighting her for everything. I guess we women will have to start checking the county records periodically if it is that easy to divorce someone without their knowlege. What a dirty rotten trick.
President Obama’s recent fall in approval rating may have an unusual cause, he may possibly be too thin. In a recent study by Elizabeth Miller of the University of Missouri, voters prefer their male politicians to be portly, while women representatives should be more wasp-waisted. In an experiment involving 120 volunteers, people were asked to assess fictitious male and female candidates from a brief bio and a picture, crucially two pictures of each candidate were used, a natural one and one manipulated to portray the person as overweight. People shown the heavier male scored him an average 10% higher for reliability, honesty, dependability and inspiration than his thinner doppelganger, but this relationship was reversed in the woman candidate. In the journal Obesity
, Miller puts this down to societal expectation and stereotyping (Telegraph
Social pressure also crops up in explaining another finding this week, this one by Meridith Young of McMaster University in Ontario, that what single women eat depends a lot on whom they are eating with. After covertly monitoring the canteen behaviour of 470 undergraduates, Young found that women significantly lowered their calorie intake when sat with men compared with all women groups. Moreover, the more men a woman sat with, the less on average she consumed. In the journal Appetite
, she puts the discrepancy down to women unconsciously advertising themselves to men, adding "the salad leaves are meant to say, I'm pretty, I'm attractive, I take care of myself" (Guardian
Of course, we all know what men really like in a woman; that she not appear too powerful. Or so says a study by Brian Meier and Sarah Dionne of Gettysburg College in Pennsylvania. In the study, eighty 19 year-olds were asked to rate the attractiveness of a number of images presented in random order, some of which would be repeated. In fact the subjects saw each image twice, once near the top of the screen and once low down. The researchers found that men rated women 1.8% more attractive when observed near the bottom, and women found men 1.5% better looking when higher up. They suggest that their findings might explain why men are taller than their women partners more frequently than would be expected by chance (Times of India
As to what women really like in men, perhaps not being British should be somewhere on the list. After champagne controversially lost out to an English wine earlier this week, French scientists have hit back at British research that concluded that the mythical “G-spot” did not exist. “Of course it exists,” say French gynaecologists, “you just can’t find it!” The original study by King’s College in London looked at over 900 pairs of identical or non-identical twins in the expectation that the identical siblings should both report having a G-spot more frequently than the others, they did not. The French however claim their cross-channel colleagues have got the wrong end of the speculum, “It is not a question of genetics but of use," said one (Telegraph
It’s been a weird week for divorcees, starting with an Indian couple from Pune near Mumbai. After years of arguments over the wife’s penchant for Hindi soap operas, the husband finally barred her from watching them any more. She promptly filed for a divorce, which was granted on the grounds of his “cruel treatment” of her (World News AU
Next is the case of the divorce granted to the Chinese couple who had not seen each other since their wedding, three years previously. The ceremony took place in China’s Machong district and was the result of an arranged marriage by the parents of the couple, called Ma and Mo, who were good friends. But Ma, the groom, left for a job elsewhere straight after and the newlyweds did not even try to stay in touch. With no children or property to argue over, the divorce went fairly uneventfully (China Daily
Staying in China for a moment, Shoutsee Li and Han Fucheng of that country’s Mentougou district are hoping a judge will annul their marriage so they can marry again, this time legally. The couple originally married in 2006 after meeting nine years earlier, but Li was in China under false papers and now faces deportation. But while the police don’t recognise Han and Li’s marriage, the registrar does, and will not let them remarry until their current marriage is dissolved (People’s Daily
Not so likely to remarry are recently separated couple Robin Williams and Anthony Hull of Kingsfold in England. Attempts to reach an agreement on how to divide their £500,000 ($850k) house have stalled amid arguments over who keeps the cheese grater and whether paint pots are communal property. The couple have now taken their grievances to Britain’s High Court (Daily Express
Also in court this week was Stanley G. Hilton of Hillsborough, CA who is suing San Francisco, its airport, every airline that uses it, and the manufacturers of the airplanes landing there for $15 million each
for ruining his marriage. All in all Hilton, a former attorney (now disbarred), cites 37 parties as contributing to the breakdown of relations with his wife, which amounts to a cool $555 million in the unlikely event that he wins (Wired
Just a few days ago, a newly wed couple from Poland had an argument shortly after cutting the cake at their wedding reception and left the party to seek an annulment. Could this be the shortest marriage on record? Perhaps. I suppose it will depend on how quickly an annulment is granted... if they even qualify for one. But at least this couple is in good company. Robin Givens
ended her marriage to Svetozar Marinkovic (who?) on the same day. Did he need a green card or something? Zsa Zsa Gabor's
marriage to Felipe De Alba was a twenty-four hour deal, ruled illegitmate because Zsa Zsa was still technically married to Michael O’Hara. This will teach you all to double-check that the ink on your divorce papers is actually dry. Britney Spears
taught us that you can get divorced in Las Vegas as quickly as you can get married, when she ended her fifty-five hour marriage to Jason Alexander. And who could forget Drew Barrymore's
short-lived marriage (28 days) to Jeremy Thomas? You can read about the Polish couple here.
Aren't you glad to see that the sacred institution of marriage is being taken so seriously?
Minister Chuck points me toward the Divorce Deli
. It remains a question as to whether pickles are extra.
Page 1 of 1 pages
All original content in posts is Copyright © 2008 by the author of the post, either Alex Boese ("Alex"), Paul Di Filippo ("Paul"), or Chuck Shepherd ("Chuck"). All rights reserved. The banner illustration at the top of this page is Copyright © 2008 by Rick Altergott.