Jen,
Don’t let the door hit you in your GIANT ASS on the way out!
-Ben
Then how come every woman I’ve ever flirted with online over the age of 30 – and at least one that wasn’t even 30 yet – has been married at least twice?
Average duration of the modern American marriage = 4 years.
Because most other people won’t resort to flirting online.
Where’s that from? If half of all marriages DON’T end in divorce, those that do must last about 2 days to balance it out…
who gets Cokie the World’s Most Expensive Dog?
Not against me you haven’t. J-Lo is A-Ho.
Ben is just trying to save his career from the Gigli fiasco.
Online people aren’t necessarily a microcosm of the rest of the world, methinks. And when you say “over 30,” that could be anywhere from 31 to, oh I dunno, 90. 
I said under 35. Are you saying the under-35s you’ve flirted with have all been married at least twice, or are you saying those over 30 have been married twice?
Where does Ben & Jen get their income?
I read last year that the bulk of Jen’s income came from the movie Maid in Manhatten. (Which stunk)
But she always is spending so much cash.
And Ben??? He hasn’t been in that many movies to warrant a big salary. I don’t even think he is a good actor. Yet the guy just whips out money left and right.
He probably produces movies.
Anyone want to take bets on who her next victim will be and how long before she is engaged again?
Shirley Ujest I will take the bite! I bet she hooks up with P. Diddy again only to get dumped after a few months of bootie call.
Is it just me, or am I the only one that finds it rather amusing that Ben was basically invisible until he latched onto J-Lo, then, right before the wedding, she wants a pre-nup (I think she’s got her hand in a few more money making ventures than he does at the moment) and THEN he gets cold feet? Sounds more like a case of her saying ‘you can’t have the cash’, so he says ‘kiss my @ss’.
She always did look way happier in all the pics than he did anyway.
Invisible? I don’t think so. He’s been in plenty of high-profile movies, such as Armageddon and Good Will Hunting.
Yeah – but happy to be with him, or just happy to hear the sound of the clicking cameras?
The former. Sort of. I’m saying those I’ve flirted with online who were between the ages of 30 and 35 (and one who was 29) were married and divorced (or abut-to-be-divorced) at least twice.
Wait a minute … are you saying that they didn’t already have a signed pre-nuptial agreement by this point? (When you’re as rich as either of them, getting married without a pre-nup is like dying without a will.)
Well, I’m just saying that your average online person isn’t your normal breed of cat - and that applied to both men and women, in all aspects. They’re not quite the norm yet.
As to the question of who will get the ring, I don’t know whether New York law is applicable, but I definitively know the answer to this question under New York law. I assume that the law of most other U.S. jurisdictions is similar.
Under New York law, a gift of an engagement ring is considered “a gift in contemplation of marriage” that must be returned to the giver in the event the contemplated marriage does not occur. This is so regardless of who may be at “fault” in the break-up.
The only way an ring given on the occasion of an engagement to be married would be considered an “unconditional gift” that need not be returned is if the giver clearly identified it as such either at the time it was given or after the contemplated marriage was called off. That a gift was given unconditionally must be proved by clear and convincing evidence. The mere giving of an engagement gift, particularly a ring, on a normal gift-giving occasion will not automatically convert it from a gift in contemplation of marriage to an unconditional gift.
I recently had and won a trial on this very issue. The judgement held that the jilted bride was required to either return the actual engagement ring to the would-be groom (which she couldn’t as she had sold it), or to pay him the amount that he purchased it for, plus interest.
If the law of the relevant jurisdiction is anything like that of New York, Jen will be required to return the ring or its value to Ben.
So, ultimately, what you’re saying is that, in terms of her matrimonial habits and the social norm, J-Lo has gone astray-Lo?
Ok if Ben gets the ring back what will he do with it? It would be very tacky of him to save it for another woman. Can you trade in a pink diamond for something else?
He could certainly auction it off. Proceeds to go to him, or to a charity, or something. Who wouldn’t want the ring J.Lo lost?