Here — above and below — are a couple of amazing works of Men’s Rightsy propaganda I missed in my survey of deviantART yesterday, both from a fellow calling himself alexlartwork22. And, yes, they both seem to be meant completely seriously.
Thanks, Tulgey Logger and Cloudiah for finding these! Is anyone else reminded of Chick Tracts here? The crude drawing, the melodrama, the excessive word balloons?
My post yesterday inspired (or at least provided the excuse for) rather a lot of comments, many of them rebutting a Men’s Rightsy fellow calling himself Good. Below, a graphic from Katz memorializing one of Good’s more, er, memorable pronouncements.
Humph, I say to the Picasso dislikers. You didn’t like this? Or this? Or his portrayals of himself as a minotaur?
Of the reasons for a retrial, improper jury instructions do seem to have a wide variety of outcomes. The jury is, after all, made up of laypeople making up their minds based, in theory, on the instructions given to them. In theory because people like Elam would ignore them completely, but in theory you’re supposed to decide based SOLELY on those instructions, not your “gut feeling” or any theories on what could happen if you decide X way, etc.
And it looks like the error was a big one — looks like they were told that she had to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she acted in self-defense when they should’ em been told that she needed to raise a reasonable doubt that what she did could be called self-defense. I know that sounds nitpicky, but beyond a reasonable doubt leaves a lot more room for minor qualms to affect the outcome.
So yes, she may be vindicated.
Katz — his earlier sketch like pieces are fine, I have no strong emotions on them either way, but the cubist thing just does not do it for me.
Van Gogh’s brush strokes otoh…fetch the fainting couch!
(And anyways, in matters of taste…mock mangos)
That doesn’t sound nitpicky, the reason I was up so late last night was that I was writing up Contract case law. Believe me, I know from nitpicky 😛
Well it sounds like she might have a better chance then. Good.
I have to say, for me standing in front of Guernica was a pretty emotional experience, but that may be more due to the subject matter since normally Picasso leaves me a bit cold.
There was a great exhibit at the Armand Hammer (Now Dig This!) last year which introduced me to Betye Saar. The exhibit as a whole was great, but I ended up spending almost an hour staring just at her stuff.
Sorry, I didn’t realize you knew Canadian law, consider my explanation for everyone else, I didn’t intend to condescend.
See, Picasso only painted proper cubism for a few years. He was in fact one of the most diverse artists in terms of style.
Interesting comments on the David Gilmour thing. (Is there a reason I know his name?)
I mean… is that teacher being willing to talk about his political beliefs supposed to be the same as being unwilling to recognise all but a single woman author? And why are we supposed to be outraged? I mean, I could see outrage if he was teaching his students his political views, but if that’s what he’d said, why wouldn’t this guy say teaching? My ghast is flabbered, and my bees, likewise, are fuddled.
At the de Menil in Houston, they have some Miros and Magrittes that are truly mind-blowing.
Athywren: I keep hearing David Gilmour and thinking “why is the dude from Pink Floyd talking about this?”
I also kept thinking “why don’t you shut up just and play your…oh”.
@Argenti – Sorry, I didn’t mean it to sound like I thought you were being condescending, just sympathising with how the smallest change in language can make a huge difference in law and while I know other people think it’s nitpicky, I don’t!
Ok 🙂
I was just a bit worried that my attempt to make it as simple as possible, while being all legalese, came off wrong seeing how you speak legalese, just not US legalese.
Katz — I realize, but everyone seems to display his cubist works and the rest…take it or leave it I guess?
Ha, if it had been the David Gilmour out of Pink Floyd he’d be in so much trouble with his wife right now, I imagine. Guess what she does for a living?
*Sigh*
Yuck. at the person who said that, not at an old lady.
@chie satonaka
That’s great. 🙂
@thenatfantastic
I hope there is. I’m USian, but not good on legal stuff, so I’ve got no clue either. (nvm, looks like she has a chance of a better outcome? So yay :D)
^according to you legal people, I think. I may have misinterperted.
In fact, because women statistically live longer, if we were being logically sexist shouldn’t a male politician reach his “sell-by date” earlier?
So, Quin Woodward Pu doubled down with some BS about how “he knew what he was getting into” and “this is what writers do – they provoke.”
No. When you are echoing the type of things that rapists and abusers say….then you are wrong. Period.
http://gawker.com/girl-who-lost-it-over-breakup-text-he-knew-what-he-wa-1404679228
But guess what this doesn’t do, MRA trolls? This doesn’t describe all women. If that were the case, then all of you are Romeo Rose.
http://gawker.com/racist-romeo-willing-to-pay-for-non-fat-non-slut-non-1385130657
Ohhhh, Pink Floyd guy is also a Gilmour? I know the name made me smile, but I didn’t remember why and it was confusing the pants off me.
Unfortunately I rather doubt Alexander will end up much better off :/ A more lenient sentence is the best I would hope for.
@katz
well, that sucks 🙁
I still can’t believe that not killing someone nets more jail time than raping or murdering them… American law freaks the hell out of me.
Athywren — depends what color you are. You’ll be oh so surprised that she’s a WoC now won’t you?