Elena Rybolovlev earned an average of £321,600 per day for 24 years… for being married

From the Daily Mail:


It’s the story of the divorce settlement between a Russian oligarch, Dmitry Rybolovlev, and his wife Elena, who’ve been married for 24 years. They met before he made his money. There’s no suggestion in the article – or any other articles I’ve read – that she played the slightest part in his business activities.

You have to assume they both lived in the lap of luxury after he’d made his fortune. The divorce settlement is equivalent to £321,600 for every day of their marriage. What did she do to deserve such an astonishing sum? She married him. That’s it.

This is said to be the largest divorce settlement in history, but it’s merely an extreme example of the toxic phenomenon of women using divorce for personal enrichment. We shouldn’t be surprised that women file 75% of divorce applications. The state encourages them to divorce. We’ll be launching a new blog in the coming days on the subject of marriage and divorce.

About Mike Buchanan

I'm a men's human rights advocate, writer, and publisher. My primary focus is leading the political party I launched in 2013, Justice for Men & Boys (and the women who love them). I still work actively on two campaigns I launched in early 2012, Campaign for Merit in Business and the Anti-Feminism League. In 2014 I launched The Alternative Sexism Project, aiming to raise public understanding that the sexism faced by men and boys has far more grievous consequences than the sexism faced by women and girls.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.
  • And what did he do, to earn that kind of money? Is his net contribution to society really worth that kind of reward?
    The whole world is all kinds of wrong.

  • I read one of the usual crop of ” Richest” in Britain pieces. I think it was top 100 UK. Anyway there were two women who had made their wealth, and a long list who’d married or inherited it. The married of course included wealthy widows and divorcees. There were a few male inheritees, but most had made their fortune. As usual the headlines quoted the high proportion of the richest are women, only the text pointing out only two had earned their riches. Of course for the super rich it is hard to have much sympathy. But for the majority with little wealth to share the result is frequently to impoverish the partner assumed to be more capable of “starting again” or putting in longer hours. Children in the equation skews it more . And without a “suitable ” home a non resident parent finds access even more compromised. Even from prominent judges and barristers and solicitors there appears to be agreement the the law is “broken” the response so far is the fudge and ignore with the result that sexist stereotypes still ruin lives. With a pretty widespread agreement about inequity this is a n issue for a campaign for equity.