THE MEN'S RIGHTS CHARTER
By Ero Senin and That Guy
Some bright bulbs at the RS dungeon think men need rights. They were allowed a PC for 15 minutes.
MEN. They protest. They argue. They rant. They're still clueless.
The following statements may be perceived as the Embodiment of Manly Anguish and should be treated as the Constitution for Men's Rights unless stated otherwise and should not, in any way, be confused with the 'Bro-code' or the 'Divine Whining'. These rights apply to anyone agreeing with it.
Section 1: a) The Right to Sandwich - Sandwich is a metaphor for food that needs to be provided when, unless stated otherwise, men are hungry or want something to eat; the two conditions not being mutually exclusive.
b) The Right to be delivered with a smile unless extreme conditions.
Section 2: The Right to be told of pillow fights which naturally happens in every girls' night out, unless it is in direct violation of Section 3(a).
Section 3: a) The Right not to like her friends. Women must realise that it is to no one's benefit if a Man is dragged along to meet friends who a) are not attractive or b) are annoying. If aforementioned friends are both attractive and annoying, the Woman is allowed to request the Man, who will then use his own judgment to see whether it's really worth it.
b) The Right not to be talked about behind our backs. If an unknown Man passes by in front of a pack of girls, the girls should not apply the demoralising tactics of (i) whispering in each other's ears, (ii) giggling and pointing, (iii) following with eyes.
Section 4: a) The Right of being encouraged when making jokes or telling stories. The Woman must laugh at the joke, even if it is mind-bendingly bad. She must in no way leave even a speck of doubt in the Man's mind of his powers of hilarity.
b) The Right of being encouraged to play video games. When the Man is busy and there are no save-points/checkpoints or there is a boss battle coming up or it is too fun to pay attention to the female, the Woman may not i) stand in front of the screen, ii) turn it off, iii) talk louder than the game volume, iv) make announcements of plans or v) disrupt the game in any way. She may sit patiently next to the Man until he finds a point to pause the game and grant the Woman the opportunity to say what she wanted to. If playing on consoles, the Woman is encouraged to pick up a controller and join him.
Section 5: a) The Right to not listen. It is well known that the Women talk about anything and everything, all the time. When without the company of a female, Women like to afflict Men with their inane, asinine blabber. It would be useless to bar this talkative torture since it is embedded deep within their life-force, so we Men, the kind and generous creatures we are, improvise. We allow them to talk but we do not listen. Therefore, both parties are happy. If the Woman, for some strange, unknown reason expects the Man to hear her idiotic chatter, she will be dismissed to bringing a Sandwich (see Section 1(a)).
b) The Right to not care. If a Man is troubled with unanswerable questions such as “Does this dress make me look fat?” he reserves the right to not answer and merely grunt to show that he does not care. This right also applies to incidences when they are forcibly informed about what the Woman did that particular day, what that Woman's friends did that day or to what anyone the Woman knows - but the Man does not care for - did that day.
Section 6: The Right to be lazy. The Woman must understand and respect that sometimes (i.e most of the time) the Man does not wish to do anything and just wants to watch TV or play video games (see Section 4(b)). If she starts nagging, she will be sent to Kitchen for Sandwich in accordance with Section 5(a).
By Kazim Ibn Sadique
Sometimes, when things are particularly bad, everyone has one of those weak, self-pitying moments when they want to go back and change things; make history run its course in a different path. And that covers the plot of this book somewhat. Except its not petty little life-mistakes that Jake Epping, high school English teacher, is out to change. He is attempting to change the history of the world.
Jake is introduced to a portal to a different time behind Al's Diner by the proprietor of the restaurant himself, Al Templeton. Al is (in)famous for his suspiciously cheap burgers and Jake finds out that Al can manage the low prices because the portal gives him access to September 9, 1958, where he can buy the burger meat at astonishingly low prices.
But Al is dying; quite quickly, in fact. He tells Jake about the mission he had set himself on; a mission to alter American history for the better. He planned to stop the assassination of John F. Kennedy, which took place on November 22, 1963 (11/22/63). But he had to live in the past for five years before he could reach the shooting and by that time he was diagnosed with cancer. So he passes on the mantle to Jake.
But the past is obdurate; it does not wish to change.
King covers the travelling-back-in-time dilemma with his characteristic use of mystery. But that's not the reason you will want to read this book. The real attraction of the book is in the huge amount of research that went into it. King paints a vivid picture of the past and the people he writes about - the historical ones, such as Lee Harvey Oswald [JFK's shooter] and Marina Oswald [his wife] - are real people and you can see their picture online, if you want.
The one thing that might put people off from the book is the fact that it is so very American, which may be hard to relate to. But then again, King has always been a very American writer. And it's not too hard to get used to his writing.
The book has its fair share of gruesomeness and evil, though not nearly as much as some of King's other works. Humans are nostalgic creatures and as Jake goes through his life in the past, moving from place to place, with cheap petrol and friendlier folks, you miss the good old days. Of course, there are certain places which are not very nice. Derry, Maine, for example. Those who have read King's “IT” will be pleasantly delighted by a couple of cameos.
All in all, a decent book. Not one of King's best works. The book is quiet; it draws you in after a few chapters and you will have no idea at which point you really got hooked - a book shaped after its writer. Nostalgic, a little intimidating, sometimes bitter, sometimes sweet; the book just dances through everything. Why not? When it is all said and done, “Dancing is life.”