I'm surprised he didn't want his free mammogram, too.

sao123

Lifer
May 27, 2002
12,653
205
106
Text

Are you a male who'd like to make $100 the sleazy way? Then I have a deal for you, but you have to act by June 25, 2009.

Of course, you'll have to cash in your basic moral decency to do it and incur the wrath of every woman in your life -- including your mom -- and feel worse about yourself than Sanjaya's barber. But we're talking $100!

Here's how to do it, but I wouldn't let the wife read this:

It so happens that on May 8, 2004, the Oakland A's had a Mother's Day promotion. There was a fight-breast-cancer 5K run before the game, free mammograms and the first 7,500 women through the gate got floppy plaid sun hats from Macy's. Nice day for the ladies.

Except that last part really hacked off a man named Alfred G. Rava. He was incensed that men weren't getting a floppy plaid sun hat for Mother's Day. He was so mad about it that he sued.

It gets worse. He has nearly won. A judge has given preliminary approval to a $510,000 settlement -- roughly half to lawyers and the rest to the "victims" -- the poor, downtrodden gender-disadvantaged waifs like Rava who didn't get their floppy Mother's Day hats. This is where you come in.

If you can prove you were one of the first 7,500 people there that day, you get $50 in cash, two-for-one A's tickets and a $25 Macy's coupon. It won't be hard. All you have to do is (A) state under oath that you are a male, (B) show some kind of receipt for your ticket and (C) swear you were there early. That's good enough. There's no video, and nobody's going to spend $5,000 deposing you over $100.

"The entire settlement should be donated to the Breast Care Center at UCSF," says A's fan Ben Huber. "No good deed goes unpunished."

So how many guys have lined up to get their rightful floppy-hat-equivalent payment that was stolen from them by those selfish Mother's Day-manipulating women? "Well, I haven't taken a single call so far," said the 1-888 operator at the firm handling claims. "And I'm here just about every day."

A's fans are not just ignoring Rava in droves; they're pissed. "The entire settlement should be donated to the Breast Care Center at UCSF," says A's fan Ben Huber. "No good deed goes unpunished."

Isn't it good to know that most American males still have a spine? Save for (cough, cough) one.

Turns out Rava is a lawyer. In fact, this is not his first men-inism lawsuit. He's been part of more than 40 male anti-discrimination lawsuits, sometimes as the plaintiff, like in Oakland, and sometimes as the plaintiff's lawyer. He has sued Club Med over a ladies-only promotion. He's sued the Angels for giving away a $1.45 tote bag to women in 2005. He has sued restaurants and nightclubs and theater companies. Mr. Rava gets incensed a lot.

Oh, and he doesn't even work in Oakland. He works in San Diego. Gee, I wonder what a sue-happy lawyer from San Diego would be doing at an A's-Twins game the very day that they were holding a women-only giveaway? I called and asked.

But Rava wouldn't say.

"Season-ticket holder?" I asked.

Rava wouldn't say.

"You went to a game on Mother's Day, to a game that was promoting breast cancer awareness, and you felt victimized by not getting a floppy plaid sun hat?"

Rava insisted it was a fishing hat.

And he thinks the fact he didn't get one is offensive. Not just to him, he says, but to the state of California, "which has a very strong policy against discriminating on the basis of sex."

"Dude!"

"Look," Rava says, "if ESPN were giving away free autographed Nolan Ryan baseballs to men only on Father's Day, would that be fair?"

"These weren't autographed baseballs. They were women's sun hats. Plaid, floppy sun hats."

Rava: "Fishing hats."

I'm surprised he didn't want his free mammogram, too.

Personally, I find Mr. Rava as odorous as a bag of dyspeptic hamsters. He's a greasy manipulator who has found a small leak in American law and stuck an open wallet under it. When they wrote California's Unruh Civil Rights Act in 1959 -- the act Rava sues with -- they never thought soulless creatures like him would someday slink about the earth.

We are not a collection of legal briefs, appellate rulings and city ordinances. We are people. We are grandfathers and sisters and uncles and girlfriends, all woven into the fabric of this wonderful thing called sports. And if once in a while we want to do something nice for each other -- and not want anything for ourselves -- is that so wrong?

What are you going to do, sue?

Yes, Al Rava is going to sue and keep suing. What's next, Mr. Rava? Kids' Helmet Night? (Age discrimination!) Wheelchairs along the rail with a view? (Health discrimination!) Mullets Get in Free Day? (Clean-hair statutes!) Lawyers like Rava suck the fun out of everything.

What's amazing is that Rava's own mother died of breast cancer at age 53. How would she feel about his crass-action lawsuit?

"I am sure my mom would be proud of my lawsuit against this major league baseball franchise that denied male and female consumers under 18 years of age free fishing hats based on sex and age," he says.

Sun hats, tool.

why on earth do we not stop all this stupid litigation? this is really about breast cancer awareness... and this lawyers is a real asshat.
the ACLU started crap like this, now its everywhere and getting worse. stuff like this just irritates me to no end.
 

techs

Lifer
Sep 26, 2000
28,559
4
0
Are you asking why we allow people to sue for damages if they have been harmed?
Or are you trying to make a case that some people shouldn't have access to the courts because they may have different ideas than you?
Or are you saying, like some do, that if you sue and lose you should have to pay the other guys legal bills, so only wealthy people have access to the courts?

Pray, please tell us.
 

sao123

Lifer
May 27, 2002
12,653
205
106
Originally posted by: techs
Are you asking why we allow people to sue for damages if they have been harmed?
Or are you trying to make a case that some people shouldn't have access to the courts because they may have different ideas than you?
Or are you saying, like some do, that if you sue and lose you should have to pay the other guys legal bills, so only wealthy people have access to the courts?

Pray, please tell us.


i'm saying that many people who hae not been harmed still sue, and this is wasteful of resources time and money. Frivilous lawsuits should be prevented.
 

techs

Lifer
Sep 26, 2000
28,559
4
0
Originally posted by: sao123
Originally posted by: techs
Are you asking why we allow people to sue for damages if they have been harmed?
Or are you trying to make a case that some people shouldn't have access to the courts because they may have different ideas than you?
Or are you saying, like some do, that if you sue and lose you should have to pay the other guys legal bills, so only wealthy people have access to the courts?

Pray, please tell us.


i'm saying that many people who hae not been harmed still sue, and this is wasteful of resources time and money. Frivilous lawsuits should be prevented.

In this case I would agree with you it is frivoluous.
But who should decide its frivolous?
 

waggy

No Lifer
Dec 14, 2000
68,143
10
81
Originally posted by: techs
Originally posted by: sao123
Originally posted by: techs
Are you asking why we allow people to sue for damages if they have been harmed?
Or are you trying to make a case that some people shouldn't have access to the courts because they may have different ideas than you?
Or are you saying, like some do, that if you sue and lose you should have to pay the other guys legal bills, so only wealthy people have access to the courts?

Pray, please tell us.


i'm saying that many people who hae not been harmed still sue, and this is wasteful of resources time and money. Frivilous lawsuits should be prevented.

In this case I would agree with you it is frivoluous.
But who should decide its frivolous?

while i think the lawsuit is silly he does have a point.
 

techs

Lifer
Sep 26, 2000
28,559
4
0
Originally posted by: sao123
Originally posted by: eskimospy
What does the ACLU have to do with this?

litigation happy citizens... they invented the concept.
Yeah, they did. They started by suing for the rights of African Americans to, well, live.
Good thing we limit "frivolous" lawsuits.


 

TruePaige

Diamond Member
Oct 22, 2006
9,874
2
0
Originally posted by: sao123
Originally posted by: eskimospy
What does the ACLU have to do with this?

litigation happy citizens... they invented the concept.

If it wasn't for the ACLU we would have a DNA database on every citizen.

People would be discriminated against based on Race, Gender, Disability, Sexual Preference/Orientation/Immigrants.

Religion would be intertwined in public schools (no matter which religion you were you'd have to listen to that of your teacher/principal/school district!)

Birth control could be outlawed on a whim.

Abortion rights would be stricken down.

These are just some of the things the ACLU has fought for. They fight to protect all of our rights, and you blame a guy suing over a "fishing hat" on them?
 

TruePaige

Diamond Member
Oct 22, 2006
9,874
2
0
Also, why didn't they just give him a stupid floppy hat? I think he was lawsuit baiting here, but if it was me I would of said "what the hell" and gave him a hat.
 

techs

Lifer
Sep 26, 2000
28,559
4
0
Originally posted by: TruePaige
Also, why didn't they just give him a stupid floppy hat? I think he was lawsuit baiting here, but if it was me I would of said "what the hell" and gave him a hat.
Genius.
Then he would have been the only guy at the game wearing the hat.
That would have punishment enough.

 

TruePaige

Diamond Member
Oct 22, 2006
9,874
2
0
Originally posted by: techs
Originally posted by: TruePaige
Also, why didn't they just give him a stupid floppy hat? I think he was lawsuit baiting here, but if it was me I would of said "what the hell" and gave him a hat.
Genius.
Then he would have been the only guy at the game wearing the hat.
That would have punishment enough.

Exactly! Everyone glaring and laughing at the asshat who made a scene over a hat!
 

Harvey

Administrator<br>Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
35,057
67
91
Originally posted by: sao123

i'm saying that many people who hae not been harmed still sue, and this is wasteful of resources time and money. Frivilous lawsuits should be prevented.

And that's why we have courts to adjudicate cases. Obviously, there are frivolous, and worse, malicious law suits, but in many cases, that can't be determined until the evidence is presented.

Everyone is entitled to their day in court. If we start limiting who has access to the courts, we risk arbitrarily denying citizens their right to be heard, and many will lose their access to real justice.

There will always be room for improving the way the system works, but some frivolous and abusive suits are the price we pay for making the courts available to everyone.

I, for one, am unwilling to submit to YOUR definition of what constitutes a "frivolous" suit.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
87,866
55,078
136
Originally posted by: sao123
Originally posted by: eskimospy
What does the ACLU have to do with this?

litigation happy citizens... they invented the concept.

The ACLU did not invent the concept of 'litigation happy' people, sorry. The ACLU has nothing to do with this, and would have nothing to do with this. They are a fabulous organization.
 

WHAMPOM

Diamond Member
Feb 28, 2006
7,628
183
106
Originally posted by: sao123
Text

Are you a male who'd like to make $100 the sleazy way? Then I have a deal for you, but you have to act by June 25, 2009.

Of course, you'll have to cash in your basic moral decency to do it and incur the wrath of every woman in your life -- including your mom -- and feel worse about yourself than Sanjaya's barber. But we're talking $100!

Here's how to do it, but I wouldn't let the wife read this:

It so happens that on May 8, 2004, the Oakland A's had a Mother's Day promotion. There was a fight-breast-cancer 5K run before the game, free mammograms and the first 7,500 women through the gate got floppy plaid sun hats from Macy's. Nice day for the ladies.

Except that last part really hacked off a man named Alfred G. Rava. He was incensed that men weren't getting a floppy plaid sun hat for Mother's Day. He was so mad about it that he sued.

It gets worse. He has nearly won. A judge has given preliminary approval to a $510,000 settlement -- roughly half to lawyers and the rest to the "victims" -- the poor, downtrodden gender-disadvantaged waifs like Rava who didn't get their floppy Mother's Day hats. This is where you come in.

If you can prove you were one of the first 7,500 people there that day, you get $50 in cash, two-for-one A's tickets and a $25 Macy's coupon. It won't be hard. All you have to do is (A) state under oath that you are a male, (B) show some kind of receipt for your ticket and (C) swear you were there early. That's good enough. There's no video, and nobody's going to spend $5,000 deposing you over $100.

"The entire settlement should be donated to the Breast Care Center at UCSF," says A's fan Ben Huber. "No good deed goes unpunished."

So how many guys have lined up to get their rightful floppy-hat-equivalent payment that was stolen from them by those selfish Mother's Day-manipulating women? "Well, I haven't taken a single call so far," said the 1-888 operator at the firm handling claims. "And I'm here just about every day."

A's fans are not just ignoring Rava in droves; they're pissed. "The entire settlement should be donated to the Breast Care Center at UCSF," says A's fan Ben Huber. "No good deed goes unpunished."

Isn't it good to know that most American males still have a spine? Save for (cough, cough) one.

Turns out Rava is a lawyer. In fact, this is not his first men-inism lawsuit. He's been part of more than 40 male anti-discrimination lawsuits, sometimes as the plaintiff, like in Oakland, and sometimes as the plaintiff's lawyer. He has sued Club Med over a ladies-only promotion. He's sued the Angels for giving away a $1.45 tote bag to women in 2005. He has sued restaurants and nightclubs and theater companies. Mr. Rava gets incensed a lot.

Oh, and he doesn't even work in Oakland. He works in San Diego. Gee, I wonder what a sue-happy lawyer from San Diego would be doing at an A's-Twins game the very day that they were holding a women-only giveaway? I called and asked.

But Rava wouldn't say.

"Season-ticket holder?" I asked.

Rava wouldn't say.

"You went to a game on Mother's Day, to a game that was promoting breast cancer awareness, and you felt victimized by not getting a floppy plaid sun hat?"

Rava insisted it was a fishing hat.

And he thinks the fact he didn't get one is offensive. Not just to him, he says, but to the state of California, "which has a very strong policy against discriminating on the basis of sex."

"Dude!"

"Look," Rava says, "if ESPN were giving away free autographed Nolan Ryan baseballs to men only on Father's Day, would that be fair?"

"These weren't autographed baseballs. They were women's sun hats. Plaid, floppy sun hats."

Rava: "Fishing hats."

I'm surprised he didn't want his free mammogram, too.

Personally, I find Mr. Rava as odorous as a bag of dyspeptic hamsters. He's a greasy manipulator who has found a small leak in American law and stuck an open wallet under it. When they wrote California's Unruh Civil Rights Act in 1959 -- the act Rava sues with -- they never thought soulless creatures like him would someday slink about the earth.

We are not a collection of legal briefs, appellate rulings and city ordinances. We are people. We are grandfathers and sisters and uncles and girlfriends, all woven into the fabric of this wonderful thing called sports. And if once in a while we want to do something nice for each other -- and not want anything for ourselves -- is that so wrong?

What are you going to do, sue?

Yes, Al Rava is going to sue and keep suing. What's next, Mr. Rava? Kids' Helmet Night? (Age discrimination!) Wheelchairs along the rail with a view? (Health discrimination!) Mullets Get in Free Day? (Clean-hair statutes!) Lawyers like Rava suck the fun out of everything.

What's amazing is that Rava's own mother died of breast cancer at age 53. How would she feel about his crass-action lawsuit?

"I am sure my mom would be proud of my lawsuit against this major league baseball franchise that denied male and female consumers under 18 years of age free fishing hats based on sex and age," he says.

Sun hats, tool.

why on earth do we not stop all this stupid litigation? this is really about breast cancer awareness... and this lawyers is a real asshat.
the ACLU started crap like this, now its everywhere and getting worse. stuff like this just irritates me to no end.

Should'a got the free mammogram, considering the amount of male breast cancer.
 

mugs

Lifer
Apr 29, 2003
48,920
46
91
Originally posted by: techs

In this case I would agree with you it is frivoluous.
But who should decide its frivolous?

We have these people whose sold job is to make decisions about the law...