Following July's eminently sensible decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit that an insane MRA had no legal basis for being offended by the trademarked term "Dykes on Bikes," the US Supreme Court has now turned away his challenge.
Joe My God:
The trademark was challenged by a men's rights advocacy lawyer who claimed the term denigrated men and was "scandalous and immoral" - grounds for denying a trademark. Dykes On Bikes applied for a trademark several years ago in order to stop an offshoot group from selling t-shirts.That was an update from his previous claim that "dyke" is associated with a "deep obsessive hatred of men and the male gender."
In his challenge, Michael McDermott of Dublin, California charged that men were illegally excluded from the streets during the annual Dyke March and that awarding the trademark would be contrary to "widespread documented understanding of the term 'dyke' as describing hyper-militant radicals hateful toward men."
Nope, just you. And it ain't just dykes either, bub.
Well done, SCOTUS.
Shakesville is run as a safe space. First-time commenters: Please read Shakesville's Commenting Policy and Feminism 101 Section before commenting. We also do lots of in-thread moderation, so we ask that everyone read the entirety of any thread before commenting, to ensure compliance with any in-thread moderation. Thank you.
blog comments powered by Disqus