UPDATE: The lawsuit has been dropped! Details at the end of the post.
A brave hero in Austin Texas has taken his fight against the evils of misandry to the courts, filing a suit against a woman who skipped out on a date with him after he criticized what he saw as her excessive texting.
He is asking for S17.31 in damages, the cost of a ticket to a showing of the 3-D version of Guardians of the Galaxy 2: Galactic Boogaloo, or whatever it’s called, I don’t have time for fact checking.
Let’s go to KVUE.com to hear his side of the story:
Brandon Vezmar met the Round Rock woman on Bumble, a dating app. They went on a first date to a movie theater to see “Guardians of the Galaxy.” During the movie, Vezmar claims that she opened her phone between 10 and 20 times to read and send text messages.
This, Vezmar claims, is in “direct violation of the theater’s police” and adversely affected “the viewing experience of Plaintiff and others.”
“I said ‘listen, your texting is driving me a little nuts’ and she said ‘I can’t not text my friend.’ I said ‘maybe you can take it outside to the lobby, I’ve seen people get kicked out movies for this,” Vezmar explained.
The woman took his advice and left the theater, but did not come back.
According to Vezmer, he is less interested in getting his 17 bucks back than he is in the “principle” at stake here, “as Defendant’s behavior is a threat to civilized society.” He thinks her behavior represented some sort of civilization-threatening abdication of “personal responsibility.”
Needless to say, the woman’s version of events is a little different. She told KVUE she deserted her date because he was creeping her the hell out. And he still is.
I did have a very brief date with Brandon, that I chose to end prematurely. His behavior made me extremely uncomfortable, and I felt I needed to remove myself from the situation for my own safety. He has escalated the situation far past what any mentally healthy person would. I feel sorry that I hurt his feelings badly enough that he felt he needed to commit so much time and effort into seeking revenge. I hope one day he can move past this and find peace in his life.
Somehow I don’t think that will ever happen. Especially since this may be Vezmer’s last date for a very long time.
Check out the video on KVUE.com to see the literally neckbearded (not that there’s anything wrong with that) Vezmer explain his crusade in a little more detail. The odds that he’s a Redditor seem extremely high.
UPDATE: Check out this interview, where he explains how he’s fighting for men who are being “exploited” by women on dates. The article makes even more clear what a creepy stalker he is.
UPDATE 2: The lawsuit has been dropped! She basically paid him off so he’d leave her alone. Here’s the AV Club on how this all shook out:
We’re saved everyone: By Inside Edition, of all things. Apparently as sick of this story as the rest of us, IE set up a meeting between Vezmar and his date, so that she could give him the $17.31 back. In return, she asked for him to please god, “just leave this alone.” Vezmar carefully counted out all the money, and agreed to drop his lawsuit. We’d like to say that this will be the last we hear of this, but we would undoubtedly be wrong.
H/T — @RemingtonWild and @ami_angelwings on Twitter
Missed the Edit…
Checked his twitter feed. Apparently he’s got calls from many media outlets, and may be on Jimmy Kimmel? I don’t think that’s going to go the way he hopes. Also, with a name like Brandon Vezmar, it’d be 5 minutes with public records search engines to find his address. No need to text his friends.
@Rhuu
Yeah, I know, I wonder how that happened? If it’s true, how did he manage to convince her? Did he INSIST that he be the driver? Was this part of the behavior she was referring to that made her uncomfortable? I know if someone I didn’t know very well or had just met INSISTED on driving my car, that would be a great big NOPE. It would make me call off the date right there and drive off.
And yeah, it’s shameful that the press are treating this like a fluff/cute story. With his Twitter complaints it should be pretty obvious that he’s doing this to publicly harass and shame her. I don’t like movie theater texters either, but they definitely don’t deserve that kind of harassment/shitstorm. I fear for her safety. I hope the judge sees all this, and tosses the case out.
If any of those media outlets tries to run the story with a “women, eh lads? Lol” angle on top, I will lose it.
Is there any scope for a counter suit against him based on what looks (to my untrained eye) like his blatant abuse of process ?
From the Texas Monthly article:
Those ARE the rules, you dipshit! If you want to go Dutch, make that clear at the beginning – you know, like a grown-up man. If he’s demanding money for the ticket and pizza, is he going to give the woman gas money, since they took her car?
I’m just glad she had her car keys. He could easily have pocketed them.
When this story first broke I commented to a friend, “well, dragging her into court is one way to make sure she sees you again.” I had no idea how close to the truth that was.
@IBH Ardipithecus:
And strictly speaking, although this guy is obviously a spiteful creep and personally deserves no civilized niceties whatsoever, that is what one is supposed to do anyway if the person who initiated the date is ungracious about their expenditures, for any reason.
If your date acts like you owe them a “return” for what they spent on you or complains about your “exploiting” them for it, just hand them the money (Miss Manners suggests flinging it down on the table before disdainfully exiting the restaurant), and you need never speak to them again.
Yes, inviting somebody on a date does imply a willingness to bear the financial costs of the date if no other arrangement is specified. But a polite person doesn’t tolerate accepting any favor/gift from somebody who’s made it clear that they regret offering it or expect something in exchange for it.
This situation, btw, is reason #42005647 why the whole traditional “dating” custom of expecting the inviter (usually a man) to pay the costs of entertaining the invitee (usually a woman) is sexist, unpleasant, and bad for all parties involved.
If two near-strangers or acquaintances mutually agree they’d like to spend some time socializing to see if they’re interested in a closer acquaintance, they should find an activity that each of them can afford individually. Trying to tempt or impress a potential date by offering them free food/entertainment just distorts what ought to be a purely social activity by overlaying it with an economic transaction. Save the “it’s my treat” occasions for people you genuinely care about and have a mutually generous relationship with.
Apparently the theater is offering him a $17.31 gift certificate if he’ll knock this bullshit off.
@YV
The short of it is that a man whose enslaver (Cotton Mather) called Onesimus (and who I will refer to as such because his actual name is not recorded) was living in Boston in the early 1700s, and noticed that people were dying of smallpox all over the place. He asked Mather why this was so, because where he came from hardly anyone ever died of that. It turned out that they’d been using inoculations for centuries, and Mather got some white people to try it, after which it spread here as well.
@Kimtsu
Not really. This man was clearly a bit disingenuous about what the date was about. From the article and his further comments, he thought this was, or should be, some sort of “contract” he was entering into. He apparently thought this payment for the ticket was some sort of guarantee that he would enjoy it, and that he was entitled to repayment if he didn’t. That’s not how being friendly works.
@Brandon
If you want there to be some sort of “implied contract for dating” that only you (and other red pillers) know about, just go your own way already. It’s fairly clear you didn’t discuss any of this with your “date” beforehand.
And yeah, this was Alamo Drafthouse, a theater well known for kicking people out for using cell phones, though they didn’t in this case. It’s also fairly well known for being good to customers who don’t get kicked out.
Brandon pretends to be “considering” the Drafthouse offer, but I think we all know he’s doing this mainly for the publicity now.
He’s the same guy who wrote some whiny piece about why he’s leaving Chicago (after not actually living there, but living in like NW Indiana). Good riddance! Hopefully he’ll do the same with Austin.
I want to hear the cries of “SJW’s are ouy of control!!1!!11” by the kinds of assholes who complain about people and their “snowflake fee fees” constantly, in regards to this guy, but I suspect I’ll only hear crickets.
AHAHAHA!!!
If this was at Alamo Drafthouse, a theatre that is incredibly strict about talking, phone calls, texting, or even looking at your phone, then his whole story is a big fake. A big ole fake.
There’s no fucking way that a person would be able to text 10-20 times without getting kicked out. Alamo prides itself on quiet theatres and they don’t take that shit lightly.
I can’t believe that ANYBODY that has had an Alamo experience in Austin would indulge this fucking guy or give him any kind of platform (which is most austinites). I hope he gets ridiculed by every person he meets.
@Kimstu
Nah. Fuck him.
Edit: I mean, that might be the best way to get him out of her life, in which case, sure. But as a matter of principle? Every dude who treats women like toys deserves to get their gifts back? Nah.
Im not good at technology
I gave up on dating in the early 90s after four dates through a video dating service. None of the guys were anything like what they tried to depict themselves as. Two were creepy as hell, which coming from me is saying a lot since I’m someone who hasn’t experienced much harassment and doesn’t have her creepdar set past 4 or so, sensitivity-wise.
I’d still be single, probably living with a friend who agreed we should be spinsters together, if I hadn’t met Husbeast after being dragged to the Ren Faire by a co-worker in ’97.
And all that was BEFORE I knew anything at all about the menzers*. I will say that this was all post-military which was SO different and nothing like trying to date in civilian life.
tl;dr – I don’t know how anyone gets together nowadays. :/
*I know they weren’t organized back then, but I know they’ve always existed.
@JS:
Oh, I completely agree that this guy is being an absolute and dedicated a-hole about the situation. But the etiquette principle for someone in his date’s position remains the same: If a date expresses regret or resentment over having spent money on you, you immediately repay them the money that they spent (possibly by throwing it right in their nasty face).
Not because there’s any kind of actual “contract” officially entitling the a-hole to “get their money back” if they’re not happy with the date. But simply because no civilized person should tolerate being the beneficiary of favors/gifts from a nasty a-hole. Scoring a free dinner/movie is not worth the price of having a nasty a-hole resenting the money they spent on you.
Some people think you should ignore that etiquette principle and just let the nasty a-hole take the financial hit because serves them right. But I think those people come across looking somewhat greedy and undignified. “Your loss, dude, you already chose to spend the money and I’m not going to refund it” is nowhere near as cutting and disdainful as “It would be beneath me to accept any favors or benefits from the sort of person you’ve now shown yourself to be”.
@Viscaria:
See above. The dude should be repaid, not because he deserves to get his gifts back, but because the woman deserves better than to be indebted for gifts to any dude who treats women like toys. It’s about self-respect, not about being nice to the awful dude.
He also sent screen shots of his oh-so-very-kind “request” to be refunded.
This was apparently the first message he sent her asking for money. If he’d been nicer about it, not threatening court, he might have gotten repaid. He’s doing this purely for publicity, to drum up business for “themessagingcompany.com”
Joining in on the local knowledge here:
Yes, Alamo Drafthouse WILL kick you out if you’re being obnoxious with your cell phone (or if you’re obnoxious, period). So I agree that her texting must not have been bad enough for Alamo staff to worry about. A few years back, there was a young woman who was obnoxious about using her phone in the theater. The Alamo staff followed their process, and the end result was her expulsion.
She reacted by leaving a very angry and semi-incoherent voice mail complaining that the Alamo Drafthouse had no right to kick her out.
The Alamo Drafthouse used her voice mail in an ad for their “no cell phone” policy.
@JS: If he’d been nicer about it, not threatening court, he might have gotten repaid.
True, but irrelevant. Generously agreeing to repay somebody for what he spent on you because he asked you nicely is different from repaying somebody because you refuse to remain under any kind of obligation whatsoever to a horrible creep who has clearly shown himself to be completely unworthy of the honor of having you as his guest on a date.
Like I said, the etiquette principle here is not about what is owed to the horrible creep (spoiler alert: nothing), but rather what is owed to one’s own self-respect in refusing to benefit in any way from the actions of the horrible creep.
@parasol
Check out my youtube link upthread. NSFW for language
@cornychips
Yep, that’s the one. 🙂
@ kimstu
Look, she bailed on this guy. Maybe cause he was a fucking creep. Then he continued to bother her. So yeah, a fucking creep. And you’re right, she owes him nothing. But if this were me, my fucking self respect isn’t lowered bc I kept myself away from a potentially dangerous dude by not paying him.
And getting the “benefit” of a movie ain’t a fucking benefit. Dealing with a creep for hours isn’t a benefit.
This feels like “women should be nice no matter what” garbage. I hope it’s not.
The “etiquette principle” here, is really not that she should feel the need to repay him because she wants to get away from him. That’s not etiquette, that’s holding for ransom. From what I can tell, she didn’t really enjoy this date much at all, so having to pay him for the privilege of not being contacted again is ridiculous.
From what I can tell she didn’t “benefit from the actions of a horrible creep” because NO ONE benefits from the actions of a horrible creep except maybe the creep.
The other weird thing about your argument is, she didn’t know he was going to be a creep before she met him, so the idea that she did this to somehow “benefit” from a “horrible creep” doesn’t follow. If you start from the assumption that she did this on purpose, then that’s one of the more common MGTOW arguments that really isn’t worth revisiting again.
Gross.
I understand this is that ‘be the bigger person’ principle, but fuck that if I’m a chick and he’s a creeper. Once again, my safety trumps being the bigger person, no matter how greedy and undignified I look in your eyes.