Topic: Supreme Court pick Brett Kavanaugh (Read 13401 times)

This is not just a matter of opinion. You are making self contradictory conclusions. Men and women should have equal rights you say, but men don't have any right to be protected from false accusations based on your metric. Saying it is wrong is not the same as advocating for basic standards (such as evidence) which protect both men and women from these false accusations and the aftermath. Even if you don't give a fuck about men, these things still destroy the lives of women who's sons, brothers, and husbands, etc. who are destroyed by this behavior. The problem is the atmosphere that not only advocates destroying these men without evidence in or outside of the criminal justice system, but the excuses and the lack of prosecutions of false accusers. Did you ever stop to think that these false accusations are probably causing real victims to be dismissed, and allowing actual rapists to continue to rape as well? There is no justification for it, period.

I see the issue differently from you. Whenever there is a unbalance of power or wealth there is the ability to get away with more using good lawyers but those people become equally vulnerable to unscrupulous behaviour from predators. Women making false complaints are jnvolved in unethical and illegal activity. There is no excuse for it.

Wealthy women get targeted as well.

Rich people and politicians often get targeted by blackmailers. It doesn't matter how you frame it but "making false claims about someone" for monetary or political gain is blackmail.

Men and women should have equal rights. That is different from being "the same".

There is also a big difference between being accused of something and being found guilty of something by a court. While the system is not perfect - most false claims are unsuccessful. With the high standard of proof required often guilty people get exonerated as well.

I find it quite entertaining you demand proof for even acknowledging that this issue is even a problem, yet you think not having any proof to ruin a man's life is not a problem at all. Hypocritical much? There is a reason the standard of innocent until proven guilty was put into use, because without it the "justice system" quickly becomes a tool of injustice. The issue is not only that false accusations are not punished, the issue is also that this atmosphere of burning the accused without evidence is the main problem. It is a FACT that there are direct monetary incentives for women to make false accusations, among other direct incentives such as hiding adultery, manipulating political outcomes, or preserving one's perceived social status.

Are men and women equal? Then why is it women are not equally capable of malfeasance in your eyes? That sounds like quite a sexist contradiction to me implying women are some how better or more innocent than men.

Regarding Donald Trump, his private discussion was regarding CONSENSUAL ACTIVITY, the key words being "they LET you", furthermore this is completely off topic and just more deranged projections of your preprogrammed caricature of the USA. Have you ever even been here, or do you just let the TV form all of your opinions for you? BTW you still haven't answered my first questions.

EDIT:

Related: Keanu Reeves Exposes The Sad State Of Me Too Feminism https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1WFkvXxbZTI

So the real issue is that false complaints are not punished.

But just because there is not enough proof doesn't mean something didn't happen. Predators are good at covering up their tracks.

Judicial appointments are also very politicized. There is something fundamentally wrong when a political process is used to appoint judges.

I've worked in a number of companies. I have seen the attitudes of some men towards women. They should be afraid - it is inappropriate and unprofessional.

The fact that Donald Trump was caught on a recording and it as dismissed as "locker room talk" is indicative of where the issue is.

Your argument is completely fallacious. Just because people are objecting to one extreme does not mean the other extreme is the only alternative. You are being willfully ignorant and simply repeating your programmed response like a robot. We get it. Sexual harassment and discrimination is bad. That doesn't make over reaction to these issues any more acceptable. Furthermore if you took the time to think about this for more than a half of a second you would see that this trend is DIRECTLY negatively effecting women by the virtue of the fact that this culture of guilty until proven innocent demonization of men is DIRECTLY causing women to be excluded, and very reasonably so. People aren't going to put their careers, livelihoods, and businesses on the line on the chance that they won't make a false accusation, nor should they.

You are talking about a caricature of the USA, not the reality. You are a mindless parrot vomiting up your programed replies to these topics without a moment of critical examination. No one is justifying sexual assault or harassment, and the implication of such is totally a figment of your own imagination that you project upon anyone who has a contrary opinion to your own. BTW you didn't answer my questions.

I read the article and it doesn't provide any real proof.

With any change in social culture there will always be people that don't like the change. Of course some people will feel uncomfortable.

People feel uncomfortable with race integration too. There is still discrimination because people feel "uncomfortable". Should we bring back segregation because some people are "uncomfortable" working with someone from another race ?

From an outsider looking in there are many social aspects that the US is terribly behind with.

They talk about left and right but the US doesn't have a real left.

The US is not a democracy and as such - some progress - is still hindered by 1787 thinking.

Where I live - if you knowingly make a false complaint to someones employer you can be held criminally liable. If that is not the case in your country then perhaps that is the real problem.

Another dumb shit missing the point completely. Did you even read the article? What about being able to ruin men's lives with zero evidence or substantiation is acceptable? How often are women held criminally responsible for false charges? Oh right, almost never. BTW it is not criminal to make false reports to HR, school administrators, or to start rumors. You conveniently just ignored that part and moved right on to your preconditioned response.

It is often the creepy men that feel most intimidated by this.

If you work with women in the workforce you just need to treat them professionally as an equal to if they were a man.
Have proper professional boundaries in place and make sure that neither person crosses those boundaries.
They seem to have much fewer issues with this in Europe.

Nicknames, teasing, innuendo and flirting really do not have a place in a professional workplace. It is a ll fun and games until someone gets upset - then it can cost heavily. There are many things that can upset people when there is an issue.

I've worked with quite a few women in a male dominated industry.  I ensure I act above reproach both publicly and privately with co-workers and clients..

Making a false complaint is a criminal offense. It is on par with blackmail, theft and forgery. There are always people who commit crimes. Men and women.  I'm not convinced that the statistics show it as being an epidemic.

"AOC blaming ‘creepy men’ for not wanting to mentor women 1-on-1 goes REALLY wrong"

www.yourdestinationnow.com/2019/06/a-village-is-missing-its-idiot-aoc.html

Happy now ladies? You got all the authority in the world to accuse men and ruin their lives with zero evidence, now men don't want anything to do with you professionally because it is a huge liability.

It's always, chase the latest shiny nickel that dropped.

Notice how the subjects changed?

I love how the left were all over this, now crickets. I wonder why? lol.

No they are not. Especially in a world of crypto currency going mainstream, anyone lurching back to the 19th century concepts of Marxism/Socialism/"Social Democrat", whatever the latest buzz phrase is for the lying cunts, well they can't have too much upstairs.

The two concepts are not mutually exclusive.

That's true and puts it in a historical context, but we've still seen a marked degradation in the quality of lies.

It's a valid criticism that I made, albeit of the current shoddy state of Neo-Marxism.

Or maybe there's some gigantic house of cards collapsing right now, and we only see tiny bits of it and don't understand what's going on.

Do you really think I am trying to convince most of the people I argue with here? Nope, the conversations are for EVERYONE ELSE reading. It is Post Modernism, AKA Marxism. It started way before Benghazi.





Prepare for the blowback

You understand that the radicals pushing the lies, and all those who follow them, really do not care if it's true? Just like they know that there's nothing in the Trump Russia thing. They don't even know what "true" means, and they don't care.

Unfortunately the quality of Left lies has gone down. In my opinion this started with Bengazi.

"there was no evidence to substantiate any of the  claims  of  sexual  assault  made  against  Justice  Kavanaugh."

https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/2018-11-02%20Kavanaugh%20Report.pdf

I think they were all made up.  Not one of his accusers had any credibility, in my opinion.

https://twitter.com/spectatorindex/status/1058483739515248640

BREAKING: Judy Munro-Leighton, who claimed she was raped by Brett Kavanaugh, has now admitted that she lied.


'I made it all up': One of Brett Kavanaugh's accusers admits to fabricating her sexual-assault claim, congressional investigators say


https://www.pulselive.co.ke/bi/politics/i-made-it-all-up-one-of-brett-kavanaughs-accusers-admits-to-fabricating-her-sexual-assault-claim-congressional-investigators-say-id9065129.html

 

Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what's for dinner.  We have a Constitutional Republic with Democratically Elected Representatives.  There's a big difference.

The trouble I have with left's picks for Justices and Federal Judges is they are of the belief that the Judicial branch of government is extension of the legislative branch.  They pick judges that will interpret laws as they wish they were written and ignore the context and intent of the law, thus changing laws from the bench through their verdicts. 

That was not the intent of the framers of the Constitution, and there's good reason for it.  If one branch of the government gains too much power it offsets the balance.  Three branches of government are limited in their scope for a reason.