It started with a bagel.
Each morning, before I go to the gym, I eat a plain bagel with no toppings or butter. Just an untoasted bagel. I usually take it with me and eat it on my walk to the gym. If I have some left over, I keep it with me and snack on it while I’m on the treadmill, like a lil’ squirrel.
Yesterday, I took a Precision Running class. I took it the week before (with the guy who commented on a woman’s ass) and decided to go back. The instructor showed up and saw me on one of the treadmills warming up. He came right over to me and said, “I was just talking about you to my friend from last week.”
“The one whose ass you commented on?” I asked.
“I told her what I said to you and she said that she noticed the woman in front of her had a great ass, too.”
I assume the point of this conversation was to demonstrate the rapport he has with this woman and to defend his comments. I smiled and said nothing because it was pointless to explain my stance.
So we’re all warming up and there’s a guy next to me who also attended the class the week before. The instructor is standing in front of our treadmills and he comments on the bagel I have in one of the pockets of the treadmill.
“There it is,” the instructor said. “The bagel.”
I joked back, feigning protectiveness over my snack.
“You know that’s the worst thing for you, right?” he asked. “You’d be better off with a piece of bread.” The guy on the treadmill next to me agreed with him. “There are fewer calories in two slices of bread. You should just eat bread.”
I stuffed a chunk of the bagel in my mouth. “I take five classes a week. I’m not really worried about 250 calories from a bagel.”
Admittedly, the teasing got under my skin. The focus on the calories is what really irked me, because talk of calorie intake usually goes hand-in-hand with weight loss. I’m freely admitting that might be my own insecurity poking and prodding its way to the surface. I eat a bagel right before I workout because it gives me an extra push of energy. While i think the guy next to me was being good-natured (flirty, even) the instructor’s comments seemed more…biting. He mentioned that he led the Boot Camp class I want to try.
“You’ve seen me in this class,” I said. “Do you think I’ll be able to keep up in Bootcamp?”
“For sure,” he said with a smirk. “As long as you keep your mouth shut.”
While we were on one of the last intervals of the class, he said told everyone they were doing really well. He went down the line and said he’d hug each one of us if we weren’t so sweaty. When he got to me, his eyes lingered a tad too long for my liking on my chest (above my breasts.)
After class the instructor was walking behind me. “You smell good,” he said. “What is that?”
“Flowerbomb, ” I said. “Your wife would love it.”
I get the feeling he’s one of those guys that – even though he’s probably in a great relationship – has a ton of female friends and makes inappropriate comments to all of them, and they all laugh and say things like, “You’re so bad!”
In other news…can we talk about this nonsense?
Tuesday afternoon, the Austin American-Statesman broke big news about a small lawsuit: an Austin man named Brandon Vezmar had filed a suit against a woman who he met on the dating app Bumble, alleging that she had been texting during the movie the two saw on their date, and owed him the price of a ticket ($17.31) to Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 in 3D. The story quickly picked up steam, and by that evening, the viral lawsuit got Guardians director James Gunn to chime in. Pop culture website the A.V. Club declared the man a “hero,” and on Wednesday, the Alamo Drafthouse offered Vezmar a gift certificate for $17.31 in an attempt to settle the suit.
The woman in question didn’t respond to a request for an interview, but Vezmar spoke to Texas Monthly about why he filed the suit. He said that after he got the text message he posted to Twitter, in which she told him that a friend was having an emergency, he decided he needed to take legal action. “I thought to myself, ‘No, there’s no responsibility here. It’s not her friend, it’s her. It’s not her phone, it’s her. It’s not me, it’s her,’” he explained of his reasoning.
Vezmar, who described the encounter as “the date from hell,” said that he didn’t think that his companion/defendant had a particularly bad time. But he did. “I don’t know that this was a bad date for her,” he said. “I think that this was probably a really great date for her. I was really nice. She seemed to be having a great time up until the point when I asked her to stop texting. I bought her pizza, drove her car—I thought that this was a fun, nice date. I wasn’t actually interested in seeing her again very early on, but she was nice, the conversation was light. I felt comfortable continuing the date. I don’t think that this was a bad experience for her. I think this was a bad experience for me. I think what’s a bad experience for her at this point is being held responsible for her bad behavior. And I don’t think she’s handling that very well.”
For Vezmar, it’s not just about the defendant. It’s about the practice of texting during movies in public, and the dynamics of dating in 2017 more broadly. When asked if he believes that there’s an implicit contract when two people agree to go on a date and one of those people pays for both movie tickets that, if one person behaves poorly in the theater, they owe the other party a refund, Vezmar seized on the opportunity to address that larger issue.
“Here’s what I think: I think the implicit contracts in dating need to stop, because I think that men are being exploited by people like the defendant,” Vezmar explained. “I purchased these movie tickets in advance because the movie was sold out, or selling out, everywhere. This was one of the last places I could get tickets. So out of convenience, I purchased two tickets in advance on Fandango. I think the implicit understanding on her part—in fact, I know—was that this was a date, the ticket was a gift, and she didn’t owe anything. That was an assumption she made, because she believes that those are the rules of the game. She has taken advantage of that. She’s taken advantage of someone else’s courtesy and generosity.”
Vezmar said that he did not ask her to pay him for the price of the ticket before the movie started. “Perhaps this is me assuming that empowered women are now playing by the new rules, which is personal responsibility,” Vezmar said. He added that, though he may not have allowed the implicit understanding that he would be paying for the date to continue until after she chose to end the date early, he did find the fact that she didn’t offer to split the check “very unattractive.” “I appreciate it when a woman reaches for her wallet or offers to pay for her part of a date,” he said. “I don’t always accept it, but I appreciate the gesture.”
The upside to this frivolous lawsuit is that this loser will be dating his right hand for the foreseeable future. Ooh, he’s all riled up and going to teach her a lesson! What sad excuse for a human being.
Now, y’all know that this post – like so many on this site – is going to get a number of comments from trolls of the male and female variety saying the man is in the right. And here’s the thing: I agree with much of what he said. That she didn’t even reach for her wallet is unattractive and rude. That she was texting in during the movie was inappropriate. But a simple, “You know, you have really poor manners” text would suffice. But no, this cocknozzle has to make a big production out of the fact that she texted during the movie, when really fragile little ego is dented because this woman left the movie in the middle, thereby rejecting him. How dare she. Could she have been more gracious? Absolutely, but if this guy was creeping her out like she claims (and all signs point to that being the case) I don’t blame her for making up an excuse and leaving.
This guy isn’t entitled to a fucking thing. He’s an adult, and like millions of other adults, he assumed the responsibility when he offered to pay for the tickets and the meal/beers. He is not entitled to a refund, “entitled” being the operative word. His problem is that he feels that the woman was obligated to show some kind of appreciation beyond, “Thank you.” The other side of this coin is when women say things like, “The meal was only $17. He could have paid the tab.” Sure, he could have done that, but he’s not obligated to do that. just because you decided to grace him with your company for an hour.
Vezmar isn’t looking for an apology from the defendant—just $17.31 and an admission that he’s right.
Because, OF COURSE.
Shame on anybody who applauds this douche. His entitlement and stalkery behavior (see the full article) is not something that should be encouraged or overlooked.