Discussion for article #240675
Well, if that photo doesn’t say “wild-eyed,” I’m not sure what does.
1 Like
Didn’t know Charles Manson had a younger brother.
When I read the title of the article I was thinking something totally different. Sometimes I guess I can be too literal.
8 Likes
Wait a darned minute, who’s protecting the bridge?!?!
6 Likes
What is your favorite Color?
“Blue…no wait! Red!..AHHHHhhhhhhh”
1 Like
he looks nice
1 Like
Another outstanding, upstanding representative of the “Men’s Rights Movement.”
2 Likes
No, that photo says “wild-haired”.
He will also be allowed to put his hand on his hips, snort derisively, and roll his eyes as if saying “can you believe this crap?” during prosecution witness testimony.
4 Likes
Bad hair day?
Prosecutors objected, saying the defense theory wrongly drags Dunning’s name through the mud.
What? Even in Texas that might qualify for reversible error if sustained.
My judge (Ernest Cadenhead, 35th Judicial District of Texas through 199something) would have burned a hole through him with his eyes when he uttered that crap.
2 Likes
Indeed. I think it’s outrageous that he lost his child custody case. He looks like a model parent.
Then again, he might have been a better choice than his ex-wife. You never know.
1 Like
Men who have inflated a loss in their own custody or support cases into a mass grievance making them one of many victimized victims of systemic societal unfairness and profound injustice have become so pervasive in family law debates that they have made it impossible to have any kind of rational discussion about changes to the law to make it more rational and 20th century friendly. (Yeah, I know). Their self-invented ideology has made the discussion so toxic, no one wants to have it just because they know they’ll show up and try to impose ideological capture. Which, in turn, sucks in opposing ideologues. It’s a real mess. You can’t talk about a real injustice to a man in a custody case, or some law that does systemically prejudice men, (like, say, alimony laws in some states that were written on the assumption that women didn’t have careers) without some teary-eyed yet angry MRA dudebros showing up to very unhelpfully agree and sympathize and then highjack the matter for their own openly misogynistic solutions.
6 Likes
Clearly the voice of experience. You have my sympathy.
I did too. I thought it was like that black guy who got a ticket for making eye contact with a police officer.
Yes. I would think it relevant which finger we are talking here.
“WHAT… is your name?
WHAT… is the wind speed velocity of an African swallow”?
I suspect if he did not take his lawyer’s advice to clean up, get a haircut and wear something clean for his capital murder trial, he probably did not look any better for his child custody hearing.
Just a guess here, but I bet you have represented more than your fair share of Charles Severances.