Supreme Court of Italy decrees: Telling a man he has no balls is a crime

"…because the insult makes a man feel less manly." (Newser)


  1. I like having Italy around because they make the U.S. legal system seem sane and our politicians seem trustworthy.

  2. …also, this could have serious legal implications for any medical professional tasked with informing a testicular cancer patient about how his surgery went.

  3. so? if i told a woman she had no or small breasts that would also be an offence / anti-social behaviour here in the UK. 

  4. Insulting speech is a crime, the court just decided that in that particular case sentencing that someone was guilty of insulting speech for those particular words was lawful.

    Italy is a civil law country, the supreme court doesn’t work at all like the us supreme court. For one, the judgment is valid only for the given case, not in general.

      1. No, it’s not legal, it can still be considered insulting speech according to that same supreme court in a diferent case (24964/12).

        This is an insult, not a diagnosis, calling someone a motherfucker is insulting even if that someone is physically unable or an orphan.

  5. Apparently Italy has a bunch of eunuchs running around getting butt-hurt when someone points out they’re a collection of of phallus-deprived, rectal/cranial inversion victims.

  6. Of course it makes him feel less manly – if it didn’t it wouldn’t be much of an insult, now would it?

    “You’re wrong, you great stallion of a man!”

  7. Can’t resist…must…resi….cannot…res….

    I’ve got big balls
    I’ve got big balls
    And they’re such big balls
    fancy big balls
    And he’s got big balls,
    And she’s got big balls,
    But we’ve got the biggest balls of them all!

    And my balls are always bouncing

  8. Suing somebody who has insulted you by saying that you have no balls also makes you seem unmanly.

    Sometimes a guy just can’t win.

  9. Why would someone want to seem at all manly? Why wouldn’t someone prefer to seem at least less manly if not completely unmanly? *confused*

    I don’t understand men.

    1. Personally, I quite like being “manly”.  Of course, I wouldn’t get upset if someone told me I had no balls, so maybe I’m not the manly you’re looking for.  (I would, however, laugh into my full beard and drink some whiskey, perhaps while starting a fire.)

          1. Ain’t nothing like the real thing, baby
            Ain’t nothing like the real thing
            Ain’t nothing like the real thing, baby
            Ain’t nothing like the real thing…

    2.  No, you don’t. 
      I don’t understand men either, but you really don’t.  And I’m confused by your view. 

      Why should anyone want to seem less or more manly then they are?  Why should anyone feel uncomfortable with their gender?  It happens a lot, but it isn’t desirable. 

      XX versus XY sex chromosomes, the testis-determining gene Sry, androgen and testosterone levels are a roll of the dice. 
      The mechanisms nature employs to assign gender and sex have worked “well”, seeing that 7 billion of us pawned every other species but some micro organisms. 
      I’ve read somewhere that in “primitive” society groups a newborn’s life expectancy is far higher if the mother has a homosexual brother.  In a hostile environment such group also benefits from having members that are built more robust, have more muscle growth, a lower inhibition threshold for violence who are stupidly, insanely courageous and fiercely protective.   Egoistic genes, how do they work?  It used to take all kinds. 
      I’ve been led to believe that today a great many men concern themselves with penis enlargement, steroids, erection aids and raising insoles next to their shiny expensive phallic symbols, wishing so much to be manly men. 

      Not being equal, is misandry the answer to misogyny? 

      1.  Not sure how Marja’s comment constitutes misandry.  Nor am I sure I understand why you included all this bio gobbledygook when almost all of gender is culturally determined (go ahead and do a survey of what’s constituted “manly” in different times and different cultures if you disagree). 

        Frankly, I agree with Marja.  Most of what passes for “masculinity” in our culture is a bunch of conformist bullshit.  I can’t think of anything really worthwhile that a man can do that a woman can’t or vice versa ignoring the basic reproductive differences between the sexes so I’m also not too sure what’s so great about being “manly” (or “feminine” for that matter, which may be what led you to believe Marja’s comment was misandrist I suppose).

  10. But what about the mere fact that considering “lacking a physical quality only males possess” as an insult, is itself an insult to women?  What are we doing to redress that?

    1. Hmmm….I agree with your sentiment….but do not women also have balls that can function as a source of strength?

    2. The same supreme court decided that the insult trascended is literal meaning and it can be judged insulting speech even when referrred to a woman.

  11. Hmmff, so what would you say to THIS guy? (Warning: Picture is NSFW in some jurisdictions.)

    Back story: The guy on the picture is Peter Aalbæk Jensen, Danish film producer and overall rich guy (known for producing a lot of Lars von Trier’s films). He published this as a full-page ad in two national newspapers as part of a dispute with parts of the press who have been (probably rightfullly) accusing him of abusing his employees and abusing public film support money for personal gains.

    But look how much he cares!  Our own little Berlusconi wannabe. :), in Danish, you could Google translate it.

Comments are closed.