this post was submitted on 03 Jul 2024
202 points (99.5% liked)

196

15706 readers
2468 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
202
small penis rule (lemmy.cafe)
submitted 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) by spujb@lemmy.cafe to c/196@lemmy.blahaj.zone
top 14 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] oleorun@real.lemmy.fan 97 points 4 days ago (1 children)

The small penis rule was referenced in a 2006 dispute between Michael Crowley and Michael Crichton. Crowley alleged that after he wrote an unflattering review of Crichton's novel State of Fear, Crichton included a character named "Mick Crowley" in the novel Next. The character is a child rapist, described as being a Washington, D.C.–based journalist and Yale graduate with a small penis.

Power move

[–] spujb@lemmy.cafe 69 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Michael Crichton and Michael Crowley

what kinda cartoony ass names. literally mario and wario, sauron and saruman

[–] drail@fedia.io 18 points 4 days ago

There is also a Michael Conklin referenced in the article spiderman pointing meme

[–] wrenchmonkey@lemmy.blahaj.zone 64 points 4 days ago (1 children)

i know i can just go look it up but I feel slightly wronged by the crop here.

[–] spujb@lemmy.cafe 22 points 4 days ago

added to the body text :) thanks for the reminder

[–] workerONE@lemmy.world 43 points 4 days ago (2 children)

"In Nebraska Law Review: Bulletin, Professor Michael Conklin writes that the use of the small penis rule would be ineffective to defend against defamation lawsuits. The reasons given are that the statement that a person has a small penis can be taken as defamatory in itself; the use of the rule is effectively an admission that defamation did occur"

[–] tiramichu@lemm.ee 21 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

Not only those points, but there's another obvious reason it couldn't work, too.

For any libel case to be successful, the key premise is clearly to show "This person described in writing is obviously meant to be me"

Unless you are someone whose penis size is public knowledge, then describing it as big or small doesn't contradict other identifying details because nobody knows how big it really is.

So you can safely say "I actually have an enormous penis, your honour, but the defendant, the writer, was likely unaware of this"

[–] blackluster117@possumpat.io 8 points 4 days ago (1 children)

However, you are opening yourself up to perjury if the prosecution gets creative and proves your dick is small/below average.

[–] tiramichu@lemm.ee 8 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

Oh, absolutely. My line to the court was rather dramatised for effect :)

What you'd really argue is that since your penis size is not public knowledge, then no matter whether your actual penis is big or small, the writer's description has no bearing on the ability of the public to recognise the person being defamed as clearly you. Therefore, the accuracy or inaccuracy of the size described in writing can be simply dismissed as immaterial, with no need to inspect your pants for the truth.

[–] Philharmonic3@lemmy.world 4 points 4 days ago

But it's not about a legal defense. It's trying to convince the potential plaintiff not to file for fear that the public will associate them with having a small penis

[–] fossphi@lemm.ee 10 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I like how it's edit protected

[–] spujb@lemmy.cafe 11 points 4 days ago (1 children)

just like my.. jusk like uh, the

[–] AVincentInSpace@pawb.social 3 points 4 days ago (1 children)

did your genitalia get changed so many times they had to lock it

[–] spujb@lemmy.cafe 8 points 4 days ago

yeah Gender is a spectrum and mine is so fluid it made the admins pissed :/