TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

  • Subreddits

      Popular

    • /r/askTRP
    • /r/TheRedPill
    • /r/MarriedRedPill
    • /r/MensRights
    • /r/MGTOW
    • /r/PurplePillDebate
    • /r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen
    • /r/seduction
    • /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
    • Other

      • /r/AllPillDebate
      • /r/AlreadyRed
      • /r/altTRP
      • /r/AntiFeminists
      • /r/askFDS
      • /r/askMRP
      • /r/askRPC
      • /r/becomeaman
      • /r/BlackPillScience
      • /r/Chadfish
      • /r/Divorce_Men
      • /r/EverydayMisandry
      • /r/ExRedPill
      • /r/FemaleDatingStrategy
      • /r/FeminismStopsWhen
      • /r/GEOTRP
      • /r/MalePsychology
      • /r/Male_Studies
      • /r/MenSupportMen
      • /r/MGTOW2
      • /r/MuslimRedPill
      • /r/newTRP
      • /r/PussyPass
      • /r/PussyPassDenied
      • /r/RedPillBooks
      • /r/RedPillParenting
      • /r/RedPillWives
      • /r/RedPillWomen
      • /r/RedPillWorkplace
      • /r/RPChristians
      • /r/ThankTRP
      • /r/TheRedPillStories
      • /r/trpGAME
      • /r/TRPOffTopic
      • /r/TrueBlackPillMGTOW
      • /r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre
  • Blogs

      Popular

    • A Voice for Men
    • Dalrock
    • Good Looking Loser
    • Heartiste
    • Married Man Sex Life
    • Return of Kings
    • The Power Moves
    • The Rational Male
    • The Spearhead
    • Other

      • Alpha Game
      • Archwinger
      • Artful Prudence
      • Black Label Logic
      • Caleb Jones
      • Captain Capitalism
      • Corporate Machiavelli
      • Days of Game
      • Deep Strength
      • Dicipres
      • Donal Graeme
      • Female Misogynist
      • Free Northerner
      • Gaming My Wife
      • Hawaiian Libertarian
      • Illimitable Men
      • In Mala Fide
      • Justice for Men and Boys
      • Kill Your Inner Loser
      • KillToParty
      • Krauser PUA
      • LaidNYC
      • Mensactivism
      • NO MA'AM
      • Omega Virgin Revolt
      • Pook's Mill
      • Random Xpat Rantings
      • Red Pill Theory
      • Red Pill Wifery
      • RedPillDad
      • RedPillDoctor
      • Rian Stone
      • RooshV
      • Seasons of Tumult and Discord
      • Sigma Frame
      • The Feminine Woman
      • The Futurist
      • The Masculine Principle
      • The Modern Man
      • The New Modern Man
      • The Obsidian Files
      • The Private Man
      • The Red Pill Room
      • The Red Quest
      • The Rules Revisited
      • Troy Francis
      • Wintery Knight
      • Woujo
      • Young Man Red Pill
  • Books
  • Dictionary
  • @TRParchive
  • Support

Ex Husband claims additional child support as ex wife earns more money (Awww, not fair)

JusticeForScalia

December 13, 2016
60 upvotes
/r/MensRights
http://www.tmz.com/2016/12/12/sherri-shepherd-baby-daddy-child-support/
Archived from /r/MensRights

r/MensRights is a community advocating for the social and legal equality of men and boys since 2008.

TheRedArchive is an archive of Red Pill subreddits and blogs. This page is our copy of the original post.

/r/MensRights archive

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB
Support the archive

Everything here was supposed to disappear. Banned subreddits, deleted communities, cancelled blogs — much of what is archived here survives nowhere else.

It stays free — no paywall, no account — for the next man who comes looking, the way it was free for you.

I pay for the servers, the storage and the bandwidth myself. If you want this record still standing in ten years, become one of the people who keeps it online.

Support the archive

Share
Share Tweet Reddit Email
Post Information
Title Ex Husband claims additional child support as ex wife earns more money (Awww, not fair)
Author

JusticeForScalia

Upvotes 60
Comments 14
Date December 13, 2016 6:18 PM UTC
(9 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/5i55vu/ex_husband_claims_additional_child_support_as_ex/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/ex-husband-claims-additional-child-support-as-ex.935903
https://theredarchive.com/post/935903
Top posts by JusticeForScalia

Job Privilege

1295 upvotes
December 11, 2016
/r/MensRights

Changing face of coding... thanks Chad

27 upvotes
March 26, 2017
/r/MensRights

Comments

[–]jfastman 15 points16 points17 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

The comments...Saying he needs to get a job and stop leeching off of her.

[–]JusticeForScalia[S] 9 points10 points11 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Probably from lazy people browsing tmz during work hours or sitting at home on welfare.

[–]rimper 13 points14 points15 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Hey ladies...Equal rights, equal frights.

[–]JusticeForScalia[S] 10 points11 points12 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

She even disowned her surrogate child in order to get out of paying her ex husband. Sherri Shepard exemplifies the absurdity of America's divorce industry.

[–]PurpleViolettron 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

This situation makes me want the book thrown at her. She has a child via surrogate, then before the child is born she divorces the father and says she doesn't want the kid anymore. Sorry, sucks to be you, that's not how shit works when you use a surrogate. And the kid is sick, for fuck's sake. Pay the damn bills if you're too selfish to be the kid's mom.

[–]CougarKiller 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

as ridiculous this is, it is nice to see it pursued against a woman

[–]xxpow3llxx 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

Doesn't this sound a little hypocritical? If a girl did this to a guy I would be pissed. If we want to set an example for equality, we should start by following our own ideas or we lead down the slippery slope to becoming feminazis. I'm sure whatever portion he was getting (off of one mil instead of three) is plenty to paid for the kid's medical expenses. Just because she earned more money doesn't mean he's automatically entitled to a larger portion. It sounds bitter to celebrate this, especially since I thought the goal was that nobody would do this to anyone else.

[–]dungone 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

This isn't about being bitter or hypocritical. No. That would require a massive false equivalence. You're asking people here to acquiesce to having two sets of laws - one for men and one for women. Where nasty, entitled women can do whatever it is they want and be treated with kid gloves, while men who had no reproductive choice get slammed with exorbitant rulings, turning them into indentured servants for the rest of their lives.

Speaking of reproductive rights, surrogacy serves the whims of rich women but it also puts disadvantaged women at risk and should be outlawed because of that. That this particular woman did something so horribly nasty in disowning her surrogate child is, again, a reason to make surrogacy illegal. Holding her responsible for her exercising her own reproductive choice with such reckless disregard for the lives of at least 3 other people is exactly the kind of scenario where a severe penalty is called for, and just.

[–]xxpow3llxx 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Literally in the title it says (awww, not fair).... so yeah it is kind of bitter. And you just said yourself, "while men who have no reproductive rights get slammed with exorbitant rulings turning them into indentured servants for the rest of their lives" Soooo because she's rich and can afford it means its okay? That's not equality. If it was a middle class male you'd be pissed, I know because you just said that.. Also you're jumping on surrogacy here when that wasn't even up for question. She paid someone (fairly handsomely I'm sure, to carry around that kid for her. Lets be honest that surrogate mother probably received amazing healthcare during that time, if not better than she usually gets. Also its her body and her choice to do with it what she wants. If she wants to make money carrying a child for someone else I don't see what the issue is. Especially since all you said was puts disadvantaged women at risk..... You didn't even say at risk for what. Risk of dinosaur attack? Regardless, my entire point was she is already paying 4100 a month, its not like she isn't paying at all. And apparently it was enough before when she was supposedly only making a million dollars. So why isn't it now when the only variable that has changed is the amount of money she supposedly makes? The courtroom isn't a place to exact revenge for doing something "so horribly nasty" or to take your stance about surrogacy.

[–]dungone 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

Yeah, well it's incredibly hard not to see the humor in the butt hurt feminists having their own laws applied to them. Unless you're humorless.

Soooo because she's rich and can afford it means its okay

Continuing on with the false equivalency? It's not about being rich. It's about having reproductive rights. Not even the richest man on the planet has any reproductive rights.

You can't flip this around and say that a woman who chose to get a surrogate mother should be entitled to abandon the child and any other financial responsibility she would have over choices that are actually hers and hers alone. Even if financial abortions were legal for men, this does not necessarily mean that cases like this one would have a different outcome. The point is that if anyone should be held accountable to the furthest extent that is allowed under the law, then it is a woman like this. If you made a list of people who should be shown leniency under current or even future laws, she's at the bottom of the list.

So why isn't it now when the only variable that has changed

You're begging the question, aren't you? And framing it in a misleading way.

You're really asking this: "why do you guys mock feminists when they whine and complain about having the very laws that they created apply to them? Why can't you just accept as perfectly reasonable for there to be one set of laws that applies only to men and a separate, kinder, gentler set of laws that applies even to the most callous woman?"

Nothing about that takes away from a principled stance on family law reform. It's part and parcel of a consistent, principled stance. And it's funny.

Also you're jumping on surrogacy here when that wasn't even up for question

Up for question is this woman abusing her reproductive rights in an unethical manner. At issue is the false equivalency between this woman and the average man who gets entangled in child support because of choices that were not his to make in the first place.

if she wants to make money carrying a child for someone else I don't see what the issue is

Yet there are countless issues even if you don't see them. The industry is rife with corruption and inequity. But for our purposes the main thing to point out is that unlike a rich man who has a kid who still isn't really his choice to make, this is a case of a rich woman making a choice to make someone else have a kid because she is rich. In fact if you look at the contractual rights that a rich woman has over a surrogate and compare them to what even the richest man in the world has over his wife - it's night and day. There's a huge qualitative difference.

[–]xxpow3llxx 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Its not separate kinder or gentler...She's still paying where do you keep getting this idea she is getting off totally free? Financial aboprtions are actually being made into a thing by the way, (last I read it was an agreement if the woman becomes pregnant and you didn't want it you can opt out and never have visitation rights but on't have to pay. You keep saying you're mad at feminists when I don't care what those whiny bitches say as long as the courtrooms don't side with her, and they HAVEN'T. She still has to pay child support, just like any other dude, you keep saying this is about reproductive rights...what rights are being stepped on here? Dude is now forced to raise the kid, dude is getting child support WTF am I missing? Or are you jjust ranting just to rant? And you keep saying we need to punish her, for what a fucking divorce? People get divorced literally all the fucking time. So she doesn't want custody ok now the dad who assumingly wants all custody since he's the good guy here, now gets to keep his kid full time and get money from her. Where is this incredible injustice you're bitching about? It sounds to me like a reasonable case and demanding more money solely after he finds out she's making more sounds kind of shitty to me, and if the genders were reversed I'm sure you'd be shitting on it as well. I honestly don't get what you're advocating for, you're saying one thing and the court system is saying another. And I didn't say she is entitled to abandon her kid (talk about framing in a misleading way) I literally said she should pay and is so what are you fighting over? You're mad because she doesn't want her kid? If she doesn't want her kid then GOOD! If my mother didn't want me I would not want her in my fuckin life! And to finalize what I was saying is we can't sit here and say, "this is bullshit" when it happens dudes, but when its a rich woman you get pissed and say "yeah fuck her over she deserves it!" Thats dumb and hypocritical and your biased is showing worse than Caitlyn's dick mid transition. Obviously abandoning her kid is a selfish act but the kid is probably better off without her.

[–]dungone 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

Oh no, it's kinder and gentler. The statistics bear this out - women in similar circumstances get lower child support rulings which are not enforced as diligently as rulings against men. You can bet safely assume that if the tables were turned, not only would the guy have a higher child support amount but also a massive alimony payment. And if he ever fell behind on it he'd be in jail. There's nothing to suggest that this ruling is actually equitable with what a man would get.

But that's not really the issue, is it? The real problem here are the usual suspects who would be bashing a man for doing something like this, and who themselves oppose any reform to the child support system. They are upset because the shoe landed on the other foot. Do you think they are men's rights activists campaigning for equality when they bash the father and tell him he should get a job? These people are advocating for two sets of laws, with a kinder, gentler standard for women. And "get a job" for men.

[–]Qapiojg 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

No and I'll tell you why. Consent to sex is not consent to parenthood, that is an entirely different discussion that happens. Sometimes this is after conception, sometimes before, but this is a decision that both should make together.

When a couple decides together to have a child, both should be responsible for supporting that child. In these cases child support is fine, at reasonable levels relative to income. Here they both decided to have a child through surrogacy, she received a raise and child support should proportionately increase with that raise.

The outrage you'll see here is against child support when the mother makes a unilateral decision that both will become a parent. You shouldn't be held financially liable for the decisions of another person.

[–]Elvick 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It's a shame a lot of people only realize how unfair something is when it's equally applied to women.

Browse all authors
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter