#MeToo Becomes #LeaveMeAlone

[Estanglia]

Could you not put words in my mouth please? I've never suggested that.

And no, it's not.

So where is it written that the law wasn't changed because our magic feminist conspiracy blocked it?

I don't think it's a conspiracy to suggest your 'equality' movement isn't actually for equality when laws like the India one still exist without so much as a peep from feminists.

In fact, there was a 2013 redefinition of the law, which not only didn't make the law gender-neutral, but according to the Times of India an attempted redefinition to make the law gender-neutral was actively opposed under the guise of 'helping women' by women's groups.

It's not a conspiracy to point out the failings of a movement, especially when said movements take actions that are contrary to their claimed goal.

[Des-Bal]

So where is it written that the law wasn't changed because our magic feminist conspiracy blocked it? And if they have so much power why is it still legal for a man to rape his wife or for soldiers to rape whoever they see fit?

Conspiracies are secret, and magic would imply something unexpected happening. This was blatant, shameless, and totally predictable. I could explain how it's easier to throw your weight around when traditionalists are behind you but that would be a waste of time because you're trying to refute facts with rhetoric which is the behavior of someone who is either either incredibly twisted or incredibly desperate.

[Merattic]

Vassenor knows that the gender identity acceptance of Feminism and Social Justice for someone born in a male body is conditional and can be revoked at any time for dissent.

This would throw her back into the condition of being seen as a "scary," "oppressive" man, whose sexuality is perceived as inherently suspect, and whose very presence apparently saps women of their agency.

So you're trying to fearmonger me into agreeing with you with abject bullshit. I thought the MRAs were meant to be the factual and rational ones.

I don't think anyone here is trying to fear monger you into agreeing with them. Some people here have however become very annoyed by how selective you are when it comes to responding to the criticism people have been giving you.

Vassenor pulls this shit even when discussing mens issues. They immediately frame it as "White men" and dismiss it by mocking the notion of white men being oppressed, even when the discussion is for instance about the justice gap in sentencing, something that impacts men and minority men most of all. They've done it in reaction to every and any mens issue being raised. You are giving people like Vassenor the license to behave that way.

Not only is it unfair in and of itself for you to defend that attitude with regards to white men, but you are ignoring how it is abused. Ask yourself. Why did Vassenor make this about white men?

there's nothing abotu this issue that makes it about white men. In fact we've consistently pointed out feminist action here harms minorities most of all.

It's because Vassenor is not sincere, and is behaving dishonestly, they are using this thought-terminating cliche you guys have normalized that white men are never oppressed and you don't need to think any further on the topic to shut down discussion of mens issues in general, even ones that mostly effect minority men.

The fact that you never once acknowledged this criticism, despite it being brought up multiple times, is the most telling part of all this.

[Vassenor]

So you're trying to fearmonger me into agreeing with you with abject bullshit. I thought the MRAs were meant to be the factual and rational ones.

I don't think anyone here is trying to fear monger you into agreeing with them. Some people here have however become very annoyed by how selective you are when it comes to responding to the criticism people have been giving you.

Vassenor pulls this shit even when discussing mens issues. They immediately frame it as "White men" and dismiss it by mocking the notion of white men being oppressed, even when the discussion is for instance about the justice gap in sentencing, something that impacts men and minority men most of all. They've done it in reaction to every and any mens issue being raised. You are giving people like Vassenor the license to behave that way.

Not only is it unfair in and of itself for you to defend that attitude with regards to white men, but you are ignoring how it is abused. Ask yourself. Why did Vassenor make this about white men?

there's nothing abotu this issue that makes it about white men. In fact we've consistently pointed out feminist action here harms minorities most of all.

It's because Vassenor is not sincere, and is behaving dishonestly, they are using this thought-terminating cliche you guys have normalized that white men are never oppressed and you don't need to think any further on the topic to shut down discussion of mens issues in general, even ones that mostly effect minority men.

The fact that you never once acknowledged this criticism, despite it being brought up multiple times, is the most telling part of all this.

Or I just have multiple people on this thread on ignore purely so I don't start ripping heads off when they wheel out the exact same spiels about how oppressive it is that women are being treated even semi-equally to men and that feminism is a massive hate movement whenever anything to do with sexual assault, domestic violence or womens' rights comes up. I'm sorry if that doesn't fit your narrative that I, for example, don't think white men can be abused, but that's just how it is.

[Des-Bal]

Or I just have multiple people on this thread on ignore purely so I don't start ripping heads off when they wheel out the exact same spiels about how oppressive it is that women are being treated even semi-equally to men and that feminism is a massive hate movement whenever anything to do with sexual assault, domestic violence or womens' rights comes up. I'm sorry if that doesn't fit your narrative that I, for example, don't think white men can be abused, but that's just how it is.

Why don't you give us an example of someone who calls it oppression for women to be treated semi-equally to men.

[Galloism]

Never mind.

[Des-Bal]

Wow.

Unabashedly and unashamedly arguing that "white men" cannot suffer abuse. All those millions of men being beaten, stabbed, clubbed, burned, etc by their wives and partners, don't worry. It's not actually abuse, not actually sexual assault, not actually domestic violence. It can't be abuse because you have the wrong skin color and wrong sex organs. Vassenor says so.

Disgusting. Absolutely disgusting rhetoric. Designed to make sure that victims of abuse can never ever get justice because it can't happen to them. Thank you for demonstrating so plainly and clearly how you see the world.

Feminism, everyone.

It's actually "[Merattic's] narrative that [Vassenor doesn't] think white men can be abused."

[The South Falls]

I don't think anyone here is trying to fear monger you into agreeing with them. Some people here have however become very annoyed by how selective you are when it comes to responding to the criticism people have been giving you.

The fact that you never once acknowledged this criticism, despite it being brought up multiple times, is the most telling part of all this.

Or I just have multiple people on this thread on ignore purely so I don't start ripping heads off when they wheel out the exact same spiels about how oppressive it is that women are being treated even semi-equally to men and that feminism is a massive hate movement whenever anything to do with sexual assault, domestic violence or womens' rights comes up. I'm sorry if that doesn't fit your narrative that I, for example, don't think white men can be abused, but that's just how it is.

Abuse is defined as "cruel and violent treatment of a person or animal." I don't care if you're white, black, blue or orange, it is still possible for you to be abused. To assume that just because whites and men have been the dominant race/gender for the majority of history, the members of this group cannot be abused, is completely and absolutely abhorrent. This is why Ostro is the way he is. He sees attitudes like this, and he then believes that all feminists share those attitudes. What the hell, Vass? I'm no hardcore MRA but even I know that that's wrong.


never mind I can't read

[Galloism]

Wow.

Unabashedly and unashamedly arguing that "white men" cannot suffer abuse. All those millions of men being beaten, stabbed, clubbed, burned, etc by their wives and partners, don't worry. It's not actually abuse, not actually sexual assault, not actually domestic violence. It can't be abuse because you have the wrong skin color and wrong sex organs. Vassenor says so.

Disgusting. Absolutely disgusting rhetoric. Designed to make sure that victims of abuse can never ever get justice because it can't happen to them. Thank you for demonstrating so plainly and clearly how you see the world.

Feminism, everyone.

It's actually "[Merattic's] narrative that [Vassenor doesn't] think white men can be abused."

Ah, so I read it completely wrong. Dammit, I read it twice too. That's my bad.

[Vassenor]

Or I just have multiple people on this thread on ignore purely so I don't start ripping heads off when they wheel out the exact same spiels about how oppressive it is that women are being treated even semi-equally to men and that feminism is a massive hate movement whenever anything to do with sexual assault, domestic violence or womens' rights comes up. I'm sorry if that doesn't fit your narrative that I, for example, don't think white men can be abused, but that's just how it is.

Abuse is defined as "cruel and violent treatment of a person or animal." I don't care if you're white, black, blue or orange, it is still possible for you to be abused. To assume that just because whites and men have been the dominant race/gender for the majority of history, the members of this group cannot be abused, is completely and absolutely abhorrent. This is why Ostro is the way he is. He sees attitudes like this, and he then believes that all feminists share those attitudes. What the hell, Vass? I'm no hardcore MRA but even I know that that's wrong.


never mind I can't read

I'm still interested where this idea that I think white men can't be abused came from.

[Merattic]

I don't think anyone here is trying to fear monger you into agreeing with them. Some people here have however become very annoyed by how selective you are when it comes to responding to the criticism people have been giving you.

The fact that you never once acknowledged this criticism, despite it being brought up multiple times, is the most telling part of all this.

Or I just have multiple people on this thread on ignore purely so I don't start ripping heads off when they wheel out the exact same spiels about how oppressive it is that women are being treated even semi-equally to men and that feminism is a massive hate movement whenever anything to do with sexual assault, domestic violence or womens' rights comes up. I'm sorry if that doesn't fit your narrative that I, for example, don't think white men can be abused, but that's just how it is.

In what way are people like Ostro claiming that men are oppressed because women are being treated "semi-equally"?

The reason I said that it was very telling is that in a discussion talking about how the #MeToo movement and false accusations have impacted men you have done nothing but constantly downplay and joke about the impact these things could have on innocent men. Then when some people rightly call you out on it you either don't respond or strawman them as some evil misogynist that is just ranting about "how oppressive it is that women are being treated even semi-equally to men".

I don't know you so I have no way of actually knowing if you care about the well being of men or not. But based off of what you have said in this discussion it does seem like you at least put women above men on your list of priorities, rather than treating them both as the equals they are.

[Vassenor]

Or I just have multiple people on this thread on ignore purely so I don't start ripping heads off when they wheel out the exact same spiels about how oppressive it is that women are being treated even semi-equally to men and that feminism is a massive hate movement whenever anything to do with sexual assault, domestic violence or womens' rights comes up. I'm sorry if that doesn't fit your narrative that I, for example, don't think white men can be abused, but that's just how it is.

In what way are people like Ostro claiming that men are oppressed because women are being treated "semi-equally"?

The reason I said that it was very telling is that in a discussion talking about how the #MeToo movement and false accusations have impacted men you have done nothing but constantly downplay and joke about the impact these things could have on innocent men. Then when some people rightly call you out on it you either don't respond or strawman them as some evil misogynist that is just ranting about "how oppressive it is that women are being treated even semi-equally to men".

I don't know you so I have no way of actually knowing if you care about the well being of men or not. But based off of what you have said in this discussion it does seem like you at least put women above men on your list of priorities, rather than treating them both as the equals they are.

So where have I called anyone a Misogynist? If you're going to complain about strawmanning, maybe try not building them yourself.

[Des-Bal]

So where have I called anyone a Misogynist? If you're going to complain about strawmanning, maybe try not building them yourself.

That's true, Vassenor isn't the one whose bandying about accusations of misogyny, he's just been minimizing problems by asking what are probably intended to be piercing questions that either go to a separate and irrelevant issue or evoke answers that he can then avoid acknowledging.

[Ostroeuropa]

But when MRAs squish gender neutral laws intended to help rape and domestic abuse survivors that's perfectly OK?

1. Nobody said that
2. MRAs have never done this.

I don't think anyone here is trying to fear monger you into agreeing with them. Some people here have however become very annoyed by how selective you are when it comes to responding to the criticism people have been giving you.

The fact that you never once acknowledged this criticism, despite it being brought up multiple times, is the most telling part of all this.

Or I just have multiple people on this thread on ignore purely so I don't start ripping heads off when they wheel out the exact same spiels about how oppressive it is that women are being treated even semi-equally to men and that feminism is a massive hate movement whenever anything to do with sexual assault, domestic violence or womens' rights comes up. I'm sorry if that doesn't fit your narrative that I, for example, don't think white men can be abused, but that's just how it is.

So you refuse to respond to criticism of your bullshit because you have me on ignore, but you're perfectly willing to throw out ridiculous shit like "Magical conspiracy" in response to my posts.

Pull the other one. It's more that you have no rebuttal to this observation about you.

In what way are people like Ostro claiming that men are oppressed because women are being treated "semi-equally"?

The reason I said that it was very telling is that in a discussion talking about how the #MeToo movement and false accusations have impacted men you have done nothing but constantly downplay and joke about the impact these things could have on innocent men. Then when some people rightly call you out on it you either don't respond or strawman them as some evil misogynist that is just ranting about "how oppressive it is that women are being treated even semi-equally to men".

I don't know you so I have no way of actually knowing if you care about the well being of men or not. But based off of what you have said in this discussion it does seem like you at least put women above men on your list of priorities, rather than treating them both as the equals they are.

So where have I called anyone a Misogynist? If you're going to complain about strawmanning, maybe try not building them yourself.

When you pretend feminism is an equality movement and say we're objecting to women being treated semi-equally (Rather than deal with our criticism or acknowledge our actual positions, I might add), you're saying we're opposed to treating women equally. That's misogyny.

These misrepresentations, lies, word games and sophistry are pretty much all you have. If I go around saying you opposed the abolition of Slavery, its not a leap to say i'm accusing you of racism.

Abuse is defined as "cruel and violent treatment of a person or animal." I don't care if you're white, black, blue or orange, it is still possible for you to be abused. To assume that just because whites and men have been the dominant race/gender for the majority of history, the members of this group cannot be abused, is completely and absolutely abhorrent. This is why Ostro is the way he is. He sees attitudes like this, and he then believes that all feminists share those attitudes. What the hell, Vass? I'm no hardcore MRA but even I know that that's wrong.


never mind I can't read

I'm still interested where this idea that I think white men can't be abused came from.

From your routine decision to immediately scream "WHITE MEN" with the implication that it's absurd or doesn't matter if it happens to them every time mens issues are raised, including mens issues primarily impacting minorities.

You know, this:

Vassenor pulls this shit even when discussing mens issues. They immediately frame it as "White men" and dismiss it by mocking the notion of white men being oppressed, even when the discussion is for instance about the justice gap in sentencing, something that impacts men and minority men most of all. They've done it in reaction to every and any mens issue being raised. You are giving people like Vassenor the license to behave that way.

Not only is it unfair in and of itself for you to defend that attitude with regards to white men, but you are ignoring how it is abused. Ask yourself. Why did Vassenor make this about white men?

there's nothing abotu this issue that makes it about white men. In fact we've consistently pointed out feminist action here harms minorities most of all.

It's because Vassenor is not sincere, and is behaving dishonestly, they are using this thought-terminating cliche you guys have normalized that white men are never oppressed and you don't need to think any further on the topic to shut down discussion of mens issues in general, even ones that mostly effect minority men.

So where have I called anyone a Misogynist? If you're going to complain about strawmanning, maybe try not building them yourself.

That's true, Vassenor isn't the one whose bandying about accusations of misogyny, he's just been minimizing problems by asking what are probably intended to be piercing questions that either go to a separate and irrelevant issue or evoke answers that he can then avoid acknowledging.

This is functionally identical to an accusation of misogyny, and it's based on completely ignoring everything his critics are saying and misrepresenting them.

Or I just have multiple people on this thread on ignore purely so I don't start ripping heads off when they wheel out the exact same spiels about how oppressive it is that women are being treated even semi-equally to men

In what way are people like Ostro claiming that men are oppressed because women are being treated "semi-equally"?

The reason I said that it was very telling is that in a discussion talking about how the #MeToo movement and false accusations have impacted men you have done nothing but constantly downplay and joke about the impact these things could have on innocent men. Then when some people rightly call you out on it you either don't respond or strawman them as some evil misogynist that is just ranting about "how oppressive it is that women are being treated even semi-equally to men".

I don't know you so I have no way of actually knowing if you care about the well being of men or not. But based off of what you have said in this discussion it does seem like you at least put women above men on your list of priorities, rather than treating them both as the equals they are.

So where have I called anyone a Misogynist? If you're going to complain about strawmanning, maybe try not building them yourself.

It's not a strawman, you did it right there and he discusses exactly how you did it.

In what way are people like Ostro claiming that men are oppressed because women are being treated "semi-equally"?

Plus, you ignored every single part of this post that nailed you down on your bullshit in order to focus on sophistry and wordgames. You even ignored your own statements about us to pull this shit you're doing now.

Your utter desperation to avoid any form of honest debate in this thread is practically legendary by this point. If you have to behave this way to believe the things you believe, I think it's fairly conclusive to observers that you have emotional reasons to act this way, not rational ones. The impact of your beliefs, as we keep pointing out and you keep ignoring, is male disadvantage, misery, and cruelty to men.

What emotions would lead to you wanting men to suffer?

I think everybody knows. This is completely relevant to understanding precisely why the arguments you make are failing, why they can't stand up to scrutiny, why you don't care, and what needs to be fixed to stop this kind of thing happening. You're not alone in this type of behavior, most feminists act this way. Think about that.

Are you honestly alright with letting hatred govern our society?

[Luminesa]

She said "believe." Belief isn't a skeptical, rational consideration or openness to something. It's a blind acceptance on faith, without any evidentiary support for such a conclusion whatsoever.

You mean like the belief that feminists want rape accused to be treated as guilty until proven innocent?

Connor Kennedy, who is obviously from a prominent political family, managed to get some of the ACLU at the very least to pull behind him, when he said that rapists should not be able to cross-examine their witnesses. It’s something.

[Ostroeuropa]

She said "believe." Belief isn't a skeptical, rational consideration or openness to something. It's a blind acceptance on faith, without any evidentiary support for such a conclusion whatsoever.

You mean like the belief that feminists want rape accused to be treated as guilty until proven innocent?

Feminists organizations have been actively shilling for preponderance of evidence (50.1% sure he did it) and have flipped their fucking shit over Trump making it a "Clear and convincing" standard, still well below "Beyond reasonable doubt.", and on top of that, Feminist organizations have set about actively banning suppressing forms of exculpatory evidence in order make that might shift it below 50.1% such as:

Rape shield laws
Banning cross examination

Etc.

So yes, it's entirely reasonable to conclude that feminism as a movement wants rape to be treated as guilty until proven innocent.

If you say "You only gotta have 50.1% to make it so,and by the way, we're banning lots of forms of evidence that prove you innocent" then what they're ACTUALLY demanding is that trials favor the accuser.

Stage One
<-------!>
->
<----!---->
Stage Two
<----!---->
->
<----!--XX>
Result
<----!-->

Do you get it yet?

Those are the fucking facts Vassenor, how about you deal with them rather than whine about it being a conspiracy merely because you don't want to admit you've been conned and internalized lies told to you by a hate movement about its actions and intentions.

THIS is why male rape victims are getting expelled under this feminist system. It's not some abberation, it's the result of the policy demands they have actively lobbied and campaigned for. Demands that have been ruled as violating mens human rights, but that their organizations are STILL pushing for.

Their demands are de facto guilty until proven innocent, because they have rigged things in such a way that ensures that outcome. By demanding a preponderence of evidence on top of banning forms of exculpatory evidence, they are shifting things heavily in favor of the accuser, beyond the 50% mark which is itself already a fucked up demand to make. That's basically undeniable.

As if this weren't bad enough, the system they set up has absolutely endemic and systemic failures to turn over what exculpatory evidence does exist which the accusers team has, because the system they demanded be put in place has ZERO fucking checks on the accusers side, gave exactly ZERO thought to the rights of the accused, AND measures success purely by number of accusations deemed true by their tribunal. They demanded a system that favors guilty until proven innocent, AND actively works against someone being found innocent. In some cases the accused is not even entitled to legal counsel while the accuser is. In other cases, the tribunal can be sprung on the accused while the accuser has weeks to prepare a case and the accused is told to make a defense within days.

Why don't YOU fucking explain all of that if you're so goddamn opposed to our explanation?

Go ahead. You're not entitled to your own facts Vassenor, why did they act this way, if not out of an active desire to fuck over men and make rape guilty until proven innocent?

Bare in mind, the result of their demands is so fucked in the head, a woman can "accuse" a man of her giving him a blowjob while he is passed out and unconscious, and get him expelled for rape.

Tell you what Vass, let's try a thought experiment.
If I accuse you of a crime and say we've only got to have a preponderance of evidence (50%) while at the same time screaming at the top of my lungs that at the very most only 2% of the time someone would lie about this and ban you from mounting a defense or talking to a lawyer, AND the people in charge have an active incentive to find you guilty, AND i'm not required to hand over text messages to you where I discuss with Gallo;

"Hey, i'm going to frame Vassenor for rape so in 6 months ima accuse them."

"cool dude, go ahead."

"Vassenor Raped Me."

"Omg, thats so sad."

And then give ALL of that to the Tribunal and they go;
"Yeah, they handed us texts showing they talked to Gallo about you raping them 6 months ago and that aligns with their description of events.".

Because they're not required to mention the first two texts and THEY find you guilty on the basis of "whats on the record"

The fuck do you think is happening there exactly?

You waffled about Magical earlier. By what magical interpretation can you pretend that feminists aren't doing exactly what we're accusing of when those are the facts?

You've got only two reasonable options here.

These Feminists actively hate men
And
These Feminists do not give a single fuck about men and their wellbeing, and are perfectly willing to utterly ignore everything their critics say.

BOTH of those are misandry, and in truth, the answer is; "Both of these are true, depending on the feminist."

Psychopaths
Sociopaths
And People Conned by the lies of the former who are too stubborn to admit it even when confronted with overwhelming evidence.

Congratulations, you fell for a bunch of sophistry and word games designed to cover up human rights abuses.
We're not going to.
How about you admit that happened to you and just move on.

[Galloism]

I do find it very interesting how, repeatedly, and without a hint of recognition, you see people arguing both in favor of feminism and simultaneously trying to pin men into the male gender role of stoicism, strength, and never shedding a single tear, and immediately and unironically shaming them for not conforming to said gender role.

It's a fascinating mixture of arguments to behold, and yet, we see it over and over and over again repeatedly.

Honest question, have I done this in recent times (last two years)?

I am trying to better myself in that front and would like to know when I expect gender roles from people (as opposed to be adults )

Sorry Blaat, I was looking for another post and realized I missed your post.

Nothing recent comes to mind. Of note, if you slip, I wouldn't necessarily tackle you for it though - it can be very difficult when gender shaming is so common and normalized as it is against men in our society to be aware of it - it's kind of like a bad smell. When you walk into a house with a bad smell it'll knock you over, but if you hang out for 20 minutes you can't even smell it anymore. Not because it's gone, but because you've become accustomed to it and stopped processing it.

It's a lot easier to notice discriminations and shamings done that are periodic instead of constant, just because they're easier to spot in comparison to their absence.

[South Ccanda]

Plus for someone else who was meant to have had their life ruined by a false rape accusation Brett Kavanaugh is doing pretty well for himself. It's not like he has to deal with such a volume of death threats and the like that he's had to go into witness protection or anything.

Brett Kavanaugh was a high profile case, and him defeating was only possible because people saw right through the obviously fake claims, but that isn't always the case. In many cases, even if the man comes out on top, many people will regard to him as a rapist for ever after the case.

[Ostroeuropa]

Plus for someone else who was meant to have had their life ruined by a false rape accusation Brett Kavanaugh is doing pretty well for himself. It's not like he has to deal with such a volume of death threats and the like that he's had to go into witness protection or anything.

Brett Kavanaugh was a high profile case, and him defeating was only possible because people saw right through the obviously fake claims, but that isn't always the case. In many cases, even if the man comes out on top, many people will regard to him as a rapist for ever after the case.

Kavanaugh is still regarded as a rapist by about half the country. Notably, Kavanaugh was not subjected to the same system that feminists actively demanded be put in place on college campuses, and as such was able to do things like have cross examinations of his accusers.

[The South Falls]

Plus for someone else who was meant to have had their life ruined by a false rape accusation Brett Kavanaugh is doing pretty well for himself. It's not like he has to deal with such a volume of death threats and the like that he's had to go into witness protection or anything.

Brett Kavanaugh was a high profile case, and him defeating was only possible because people saw right through the obviously fake claims, but that isn't always the case. In many cases, even if the man comes out on top, many people will regard to him as a rapist for ever after the case.

I mean, I don't really know if they were false. You can't say there were. You can't say they weren't.

[Vassenor]

Plus for someone else who was meant to have had their life ruined by a false rape accusation Brett Kavanaugh is doing pretty well for himself. It's not like he has to deal with such a volume of death threats and the like that he's had to go into witness protection or anything.

Brett Kavanaugh was a high profile case, and him defeating was only possible because people saw right through the obviously fake claims, but that isn't always the case. In many cases, even if the man comes out on top, many people will regard to him as a rapist for ever after the case.

So when were they proven to be false?

[Ostroeuropa]

Brett Kavanaugh was a high profile case, and him defeating was only possible because people saw right through the obviously fake claims, but that isn't always the case. In many cases, even if the man comes out on top, many people will regard to him as a rapist for ever after the case.

So when were they proven to be false?

Multiple accusations against him were proven to be false. In this case it actually Include one of the things you seem so intent on straw-manning everyone over in order to avoid acknowledging reality, a literal conspiracy against him.

[South Ccanda]

Brett Kavanaugh was a high profile case, and him defeating was only possible because people saw right through the obviously fake claims, but that isn't always the case. In many cases, even if the man comes out on top, many people will regard to him as a rapist for ever after the case.

So when were they proven to be false?

easy, when they were dismissed. Of course I know they weren't proven false, but it's dumb to sit here and just say, "Brett Kavanaugh is allegedly a possible rapist." Eventually, you gotta look at the facts (Or lack thereof) and take a stance.

[South Ccanda]

Brett Kavanaugh was a high profile case, and him defeating was only possible because people saw right through the obviously fake claims, but that isn't always the case. In many cases, even if the man comes out on top, many people will regard to him as a rapist for ever after the case.

Kavanaugh is still regarded as a rapist by about half the country. Notably, Kavanaugh was not subjected to the same system that feminists actively demanded be put in place on college campuses, and as such was able to do things like have cross examinations of his accusers.

wait, you mean they don't want the accusers to be subjected to cross-examination? What the hell?

[Ostroeuropa]

Kavanaugh is still regarded as a rapist by about half the country. Notably, Kavanaugh was not subjected to the same system that feminists actively demanded be put in place on college campuses, and as such was able to do things like have cross examinations of his accusers.

wait, you mean they don't want the accusers to be subjected to cross-examination? What the hell?

The system feminists set up on college campuses prevents accusers from being cross examined, and has no obligation on those representing the accused to turn over exculpatory evidence to the defense. In some cases, the defense is not entitled to counsel and so on, see here for a list of bullshit, probably not comprehensive list:

viewtopic.php?p=35023907#p35023907

It's such a malicious system that it goes beyond mere incompetence as an explanation. There has to be an active contempt for men involved, or complete and total disregard for their wellbeing to such an extent that if a woman says she wants to hurt a man they're okay with facilitating it.