Well he had a dog of a day.

Not Wedding tackle but Seperation Tackle.

presumably she wanted him to get the snip?

[rule 8 invoked] [taxi called]

Since I know the rules of Reg Club by rote I will not ask the obvious question, but really, domestic abuse hasn't been a laughing matter since at least the 80's, you wouldn't have posted this story in such a light-hearted manner if the genders had been reversed.... oh wait... never mind.

...how about "woman bites 'man's meat and two veg'"?

<< Seriously?

Destroy it. Now.

.. she was 2 stops short of Dagenham

OK, Hat, Coat, Door.....

How far behind us are the U.S. on Eastenders?

figurine/doorstop approach is so old hat.

....when he muttered "Aw, bite me, bitch.".

If she had taken him literally, she would have bitten his (female) dog.

Boyf? You are not a 14-year old girl. Stop it.

So a woman beats a bloke up and tries to kill him with a knife... that's funny.

Yet a bloke even raises his voice....... it's deeply deeply wrong.

I guess you guys have the "All men are b***ards" knife block too.

Boyf? Please!

....when he muttered "Aw, bite me, bitch.".

Somewhere inside this story lurks a deep dark truth about the domestic violence meted out by women on abused men. Seems like it is going to stay there, well concealed by stereotypes.

Oops... "literally" is what I meant to spell.

I will not be so illiterate when spelling literally.

I will not be so illiterate when spelling literally.

I will not be so illiterate when spelling literally.

I will not be so illiterate when spelling literally.

I will not be so illiterate when spelling literally.

I will not be so illiterate when spelling literally.

.. ad nauseum

- He was for once glad she didn't swallow

- It must have put a dent(ure) in his manhood

- There were still hard feelings afterwards

- He responded bravely "..t'is but a prick". (Thanks, Monty P.)

- Their relationship was a 'phallusy'

Trying-to-avoid-catching-anything-in-me-zipper-as-I-don-me-coat...

Keep writing (NO copy/paste!), because it's not "ad nauseum"... It is spelled ad nauseam.

I agree there.

But "laughing gear" was good.

I'm still not quite sure how an enraged woman was able to bite a man in the pecker. Any woman who lunges at my crotch head first after smashing me with a figurine had better be prepared for some evasive maneuvering on my part. I have this visual of a woman landing face first on the carpet after I take a slight sidestep to the left. Maybe he had a larger "target" than mine.

Or was she a woman with "nasty, big, pointy teeth?" Some sort of cock-eating undead zombie I suppose.

And why do we never hear of men getting in trouble for consuming badly packed kebab?

Are you kidding?

Thats worse than mobo and lappy combined.

Injured Testicles

That this story has been treated as funny, and that if the genders had been reversed it wouldn't have been, shows how deeply ingrained the double standards of feminism have become. I am personally familiar with cases of domestic violence committed against men by women and in all of these cases the charges were dismissed because of "insufficient evidence". Yet in two of these cases when it came to divorce the woman then cried domestic violence against the MAN to win custody, and the men were denied access to their children on those grounds even though there was NO evidence to support the womens' claims.

I always laugh mockingly when I see feminists going on about "but feminism is about equal rights for everyone" - no it bloody well isn't. It's about rights ONLY for women, and they don't give a toss about men; the clue is in the word - FEMinism.

The systematic demonisation of male sexuality has been the major contributor to this. One-sided sexual-harassment laws targeting traditionally male sexual behaviour, "rape" being redefined to include even consensual sex where the woman says "no" seconds before the male actually ejaculates, the "discomfort" of some women when men merely look at them, instead accepting the look as a compliment - all these point to systematic societal engineering by feminists to paint men as filthy sex-obsessed pigs while evangelising women as innocent victims who can do no wrong. As long as this attitude prevails in our society, the dangers to men of participating in relationships remain acute, and you pursue them only at your peril.

I have to agree - to some extent at least.

Rape is a tricky subject, and there have been grotesque cases of both persecution of men and condemnation of women.

I am however most indignant with (usually) women reporting a rape which never happened - just to get revenge over some poor sod. A couple of years in the slammer would be a suitable punishment!

Yes it's a double standard.

But a man getting bit in the todger is up there with someone being hit in the head with an anvil. It's funny as long as no one is badly injured.

I don't know why there are endless amounts of home video shows with men being hit in their sack. It's just the way it is. I'd even assume that a man being hit in the privates was deemed funny long before any sort of feminist movement. Is a woman getting hit in the vag funny? No. But I think this may have more to do with schoolyard conditioning and "Bangkok" jokes making it socially acceptable to find male groin injuries funny. What's the capital of Thailand? "Bang-Vag!" See, it just doesn't work.

As for the double standards in domestic violence and rape laws? I'd agree with you if I wasn't being watched by the femmes in the pink helicopters.

"A couple of years in the slammer would be a suitable punishment!"

Sounds nice but after some thought I guess that the idea of giving the woman the same sentence the falsely accused man got wouldn't be a good idea.

As things stand in most countries atm, the woman gets little if any punishment for sending a man to prison for however long, doing huge amounts of damage to his career and family in the process. Sure, justice demands that she should serve at least as long as the poor guy did, but imagine the unlikelyhood of her coming forward and saying it was false if she knew that she was going to do 10 years for it? (even though, since her lie led to some innocent man doing 10 years, it is only right).

No, sadly it would be better for that man if things remain as they are. At least that way he has some chance of eventually getting cleared.