 |
| pic:impathilm Pichost.me |
Today was a bad day for 23-year-old part-time waitress and student Jessica Heiders, after the Court of Public Opinion ruled in favour of Men Everywhere’s claim that the defendant, Heiders, was “not really all that hot any more” and no longer “good looking enough” to warrant the continued acts of desperate males stooping to social lows in an attempt to escape the friendzone and get with her.
Though Heiders used to be hot enough to get away with anything (like many other reported women) the Counsel for the Prosecution argued that she was no longer considered by “a lot of guys we know” as “actually all that bangable anymore” and so no longer qualified for her various I’d-Tap-That privileges.
“We live in a society of constantly shifting agreements of which women met the strict criteria of our white, idealised notions of beauty,” said lead prosecutor Ayam de Villes-Zadvokat. “There are only so many girls we can let pretend we’re good enough friends for them to jump the queue at Friars or any nightclub, only for us to be dropped within seconds for someone else who happens to be closer to the douche bouncer and his prized entrance.”
De Villes-Zadvokat went on to add that “there was really only so much extra homework we can do for other people in hopes of us getting in there”.
Many men have agreed.
“It’s been months now of me listening to her blathering-ons, opening the door for her, being polite and kind and complimentary, and just generally being really nice to her,” said 23-year-old fellow French student who sometimes does her translation assignments Charl Louw, “and still she hasn’t slept with me. I’m beginning to think she’s taking advantage of my honest, sincere friendship.”
Now after months of trial hearings and scathing cross-examination, the Court ruled that men should no longer do her Politics assignments or be understanding or sympathetic when she’s really just being an irrational bitch to you.
“The evidence speaks for itself,” said Justice Jimmy Haders, pointing out Louw’s Formula of Attractivenes. “If we look at the objective science, she just isn’t worth it anymore.”
He continued.
“I know a lot of you used to be okay with her droning on about her tedious and empty life of meaningless and ultimately irrelevant problems with her drug-addict father and depressed mother because you totally want to hit that, but this is no longer acceptable. She doesn’t meet the basic subminimums for this sort of preferential special treatment.”
The controversial precedent for Men vs Heiders, 2014 has now been set and the Court’s decision may have far reaching implications for women and men everywhere.
“Every day, thousands of men around the world treat certain women with more patience and kindness than their lesser, inferior, lower-than-a-low-seven counterparts,” he said. “No longer. Now the world has become a slightly more equal place.”
Heiders, however, has since lodged an appeal with the Supreme Court, but inside sources say her application has little chance of success.
“The judge in charge of submissions is really busy with a whole bunch of other legal matters,” they said, asking not to be named because they were pretty much making all this up as they went along. “Besides, there’s this totally smoking babe in the Courtroom - Chelsea, god, bro, you should see her, you’d die - and she asked him to fill in a little bit of paperwork for her if he wasn’t too busy, nothing too serious, just a couple of full legal applications in triplicate. And so he’ll be busy with that.”
Heiders, however, remains heartbroken at the decision.
“This is terrible!” she wept in bitter and impotent rage. “However will I get by without hundreds of spineless men whose lack of talent, charm, charisma or real sexual attraction forces them to try get into my pants with meaningless acts that anyone can do? Without these guys, who assume that doing said acts automatically requires me to sleep with them, however will I cope?”
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete