An "ex-lover" of Sumner Redstone, chairman of the one of the world's largest media companies, is arguing in court that even though he has forcefully stated that he no longer wants her in his life, that she should be involved anyway - http://archive.is/fByRQ .

Redstone, who is currently in poor health, removed his ex-girlfriend from his advance directive in favor of his daughter.

"He also removed her (ex-girlfriend) from his personal estate plan, in which he had planned to leave her $50 million and his $20 million Los Angeles mansion."

Redstone produced an 18-minute video, forcefully rejecting the notion that his ex-girlfriend "should be in charge of his health care, or a part of his life at all."

Despite this, her attorneys argued in a filing:

"It cannot be that an elderly person — particularly an elderly individual whom everyone agrees is susceptible to undue influence — can simply state what he wants, and have that accepted as gospel."

Therefore, even after clearly stating what he wants, he should not be permitted free will, because he is "susceptible to undue influence."

However, are not many females "susceptible to undue influence?" Women tend to follow the crowd more than men and are the primary consumer good purchasers. Most advertising is probably primarily aimed at females because they are more susceptible to its effects than males.

It should also be noted that "she charged more than $265,000 to his American Express card."

It seems that even not marrying and not having children with women is not enough to protect men's finances and control over their lives. Now even ex-girlfriends are attempting to use the courts to establish power over men without even claims of abuse or sexual assault.