#MeToo Becomes #LeaveMeAlone

[New Mivango]

When I hear, "believeallwomen," it translates in my mind to "presume guilt until innocence is proven," which is the inverse of due process and the most basic principle of Western jurisprudence, that of a fair trial.

When I hear "The Future is Female," it translates to an imposed matriarchal order that reduces men to second-class citizens.

Frankly, I think that society should become more meritocratic, with gender completely immaterial to advancement, and that can never happen while the radical wing of the feminist movement dominates both feminism itself and the conversation. The moderate wing needs to assert itself and take that movement over again, before there's a civil war in the West and it becomes a bloodbath. Especially since it would be naive to think that there would be any real winners. No matter which side won, we'd all lose when law and order completely broke down, and that will happen. It not merely might happen, but it will happen, if the radical wing of feminism continues to hold sway. They'll have blood on their hands, men's, women's, and children's.

[Vassenor]

When I hear, "believeallwomen," it translates in my mind to "presume guilt until innocence is proven," which is the inverse of due process and the most basic principle of Western jurisprudence, that of a fair trial.

When I hear "The Future is Female," it translates to an imposed matriarchal order that reduces men to second-class citizens.

Frankly, I think that society should become more meritocratic, with gender completely immaterial to advancement, and that can never happen while the radical wing of the feminist movement dominates both feminism itself and the conversation. The moderate wing needs to assert itself and take that movement over again, before there's a civil war in the West and it becomes a bloodbath. Especially since it would be naive to think that there would be any real winners. No matter which side won, we'd all lose when law and order completely broke down, and that will happen. It not merely might happen, but it will happen, if the radical wing of feminism continues to hold sway. They'll have blood on their hands, men's, women's, and children's.

Pretty sure "believe women" just means "don't dismiss accusations out of hand and actually investigate them". But I get that that doesn't really gel with this idea that feminism wants to take over the world.

[New Mivango]

When I hear, "believeallwomen," it translates in my mind to "presume guilt until innocence is proven," which is the inverse of due process and the most basic principle of Western jurisprudence, that of a fair trial.

When I hear "The Future is Female," it translates to an imposed matriarchal order that reduces men to second-class citizens.

Frankly, I think that society should become more meritocratic, with gender completely immaterial to advancement, and that can never happen while the radical wing of the feminist movement dominates both feminism itself and the conversation. The moderate wing needs to assert itself and take that movement over again, before there's a civil war in the West and it becomes a bloodbath. Especially since it would be naive to think that there would be any real winners. No matter which side won, we'd all lose when law and order completely broke down, and that will happen. It not merely might happen, but it will happen, if the radical wing of feminism continues to hold sway. They'll have blood on their hands, men's, women's, and children's.

Pretty sure "believe women" just means "don't dismiss accusations out of hand and actually investigate them". But I get that that doesn't really gel with this idea that feminism wants to take over the world.

If they just mean "don't dismiss women," that's what they should say. Saying "believe women," instead, along with saying "the future is female," doesn't exactly reduce misgivings and suspicion. Yes, as you might note, I acknowledge that moderate feminists do exist. They're just too cowardly to actually stand up to the extremists in their movement.

[His Excellence]

I'd think that with the very real issue of men taking advantage of their position to exploit female employees, if anything, having a third party keep an eye on situations where they'd otherwise be alone would be more to the benefit of the women than the men. It would certainly prevent more instances of sexual harassment/assault than it would prevent false claims; even then, given the fact that false rape claims just give ammo for the misogynists to cast doubt on victims, wouldn't preventing them be good for everyone anyway? Plus, you know, if I was a woman trying to get into a profession dominated by men with a higher than average tendency towards sociopathy, you couldn't pay me enough to sit in a room with one of them and have nobody trustworthy around. Being paranoid's better than being raped.

But I guess because the practice was initiated by a man it must be a tool of sexist oppression right? A woman not wanting to be left alone with a man is totally justified because some could be perverts and it only takes one to attack them. But men who don't want to be left alone with a woman because it only takes one to slander them and destroy their lives (whether or not they did anything, that's the key part that seems to keep getting forgotten, with the "just desserts" comments) are totally just sexist pigs trying to bring all women down. Seriously? Talk about double standards.

This thread's gone on and on about men who act inappropriately, but when I mentioned my experiences with women groping or mudslinging me, everyone ignores it. Thanks for that btw, I totally don't feel alone or damaged enough in my day to day life. Guess I just need to man up and deal with it right? I've got a dick, so my suffering and input doesn't matter.

All the anti-male strawmanning, "women wouldn't lie about something so serious, and if you have any concern about it happening, it's because you hate/fear all women and want to silence victims" mentality going on in this thread is exactly why innocent men have reason to be afraid of women they've done nothing to wrong.

[Vassenor]

Pretty sure "believe women" just means "don't dismiss accusations out of hand and actually investigate them". But I get that that doesn't really gel with this idea that feminism wants to take over the world.

If they just mean "don't dismiss women," that's what they should say. Saying "believe women," instead, along with saying "the future is female," doesn't exactly reduce misgivings and suspicion. Yes, as you might note, I acknowledge that moderate feminists do exist. They're just too cowardly to actually stand up to the extremists in their movement.

And yet you haven't offered anything beyond "this means this because I say so".

[New Mivango]

I'd think that with the very real issue of men taking advantage of their position to exploit female employees, if anything, having a third party keep an eye on situations where they'd otherwise be alone would be more to the benefit of the women than the men. It would certainly prevent more instances of sexual harassment/assault than it would prevent false claims; even then, given the fact that false rape claims just give ammo for the misogynists to cast doubt on victims, wouldn't preventing them be good for everyone anyway? Plus, you know, if I was a woman trying to get into a profession dominated by men with a higher than average tendency towards sociopathy, you couldn't pay me enough to sit in a room with one of them and have nobody trustworthy around. Being paranoid's better than being raped.

But I guess because the practice was initiated by a man it must be a tool of sexist oppression right? A woman not wanting to be left alone with a man is totally justified because some could be perverts and it only takes one to attack them. But men who don't want to be left alone with a woman because it only takes one to slander them and destroy their lives (whether or not they did anything, that's the key part that seems to keep getting forgotten, with the "just desserts" comments) are totally just sexist pigs trying to bring all women down. Seriously? Talk about double standards.

This thread's gone on and on about men who act inappropriately, but when I mentioned my experiences with women groping or mudslinging me, everyone ignores it. Thanks for that btw, I totally don't feel alone or damaged enough in my day to day life. Guess I just need to man up and deal with it right? I've got a dick, so my suffering and input doesn't matter.

All the anti-male strawmanning, "women wouldn't lie about something so serious, and if you have any concern about it happening, it's because you hate/fear all women and want to silence victims" mentality going on in this thread is exactly why innocent men have reason to be afraid of women they've done nothing to wrong.

Right along with the whole "drowning in male tears" theme, too, well, next time women have a grievance of any sort, allow me to rosin up the bow and play the world's smallest violin, too. Payback's a bitch.

[New Mivango]

If they just mean "don't dismiss women," that's what they should say. Saying "believe women," instead, along with saying "the future is female," doesn't exactly reduce misgivings and suspicion. Yes, as you might note, I acknowledge that moderate feminists do exist. They're just too cowardly to actually stand up to the extremists in their movement.

And yet you haven't offered anything beyond "this means this because I say so".

"Believe" has a very distinct and singular meaning. It doesn't mean "don't dismiss." It means, "accept at face value." The same way that "believe in Jesus" doesn't mean don't dismiss the Nazarene, but actually believe the claims about him. Same concept. I'm not personally a big fan of faith as a matter of principle. I'm much more into skepticism myself.

What I do "believe" in is coming out and saying exactly what one means and not hiding behind cliches and euphemisms.

[Liriena]

I'd think that with the very real issue of men taking advantage of their position to exploit female employees, if anything, having a third party keep an eye on situations where they'd otherwise be alone would be more to the benefit of the women than the men. It would certainly prevent more instances of sexual harassment/assault than it would prevent false claims; even then, given the fact that false rape claims just give ammo for the misogynists to cast doubt on victims, wouldn't preventing them be good for everyone anyway? Plus, you know, if I was a woman trying to get into a profession dominated by men with a higher than average tendency towards sociopathy, you couldn't pay me enough to sit in a room with one of them and have nobody trustworthy around. Being paranoid's better than being raped.

But I guess because the practice was initiated by a man it must be a tool of sexist oppression right? A woman not wanting to be left alone with a man is totally justified because some could be perverts and it only takes one to attack them. But men who don't want to be left alone with a woman because it only takes one to slander them and destroy their lives (whether or not they did anything, that's the key part that seems to keep getting forgotten, with the "just desserts" comments) are totally just sexist pigs trying to bring all women down. Seriously? Talk about double standards.

This thread's gone on and on about men who act inappropriately, but when I mentioned my experiences with women groping or mudslinging me, everyone ignores it. Thanks for that btw, I totally don't feel alone or damaged enough in my day to day life. Guess I just need to man up and deal with it right? I've got a dick, so my suffering and input doesn't matter.

All the anti-male strawmanning, "women wouldn't lie about something so serious, and if you have any concern about it happening, it's because you hate/fear all women and want to silence victims" mentality going on in this thread is exactly why innocent men have reason to be afraid of women they've done nothing to wrong.

Right along with the whole "drowning in male tears" theme, too, well, next time women have a grievance of any sort, allow me to rosin up the bow and play the world's smallest violin, too. Payback's a bitch.

We get it: your gender politics are fueled by fragility and resentment.

[New Mivango]

Right along with the whole "drowning in male tears" theme, too, well, next time women have a grievance of any sort, allow me to rosin up the bow and play the world's smallest violin, too. Payback's a bitch.

We get it: your gender politics are fueled by fragility and resentment.

No fragility here, but there's plenty of resentment of the whole "drowning in male tears" attitude of the modern feminist movement, which is dominated by its extremists, not by its moderates, whose silence is complicity.

[Mzeusia]

Well I think the reaction of men makes sense. If they feel that anything they do will be scrutinised for sexism, is it any wonder that they will change their behaviour?

I wonder how widespread a reaction this is though, and if it is widespread to a significant extent, what will be some of the reactions from women and what changes if any will the new eggshell atmosphere create?

[South Ccanda]

When I hear, "believeallwomen," it translates in my mind to "presume guilt until innocence is proven," which is the inverse of due process and the most basic principle of Western jurisprudence, that of a fair trial.

When I hear "The Future is Female," it translates to an imposed matriarchal order that reduces men to second-class citizens.

Frankly, I think that society should become more meritocratic, with gender completely immaterial to advancement, and that can never happen while the radical wing of the feminist movement dominates both feminism itself and the conversation. The moderate wing needs to assert itself and take that movement over again, before there's a civil war in the West and it becomes a bloodbath. Especially since it would be naive to think that there would be any real winners. No matter which side won, we'd all lose when law and order completely broke down, and that will happen. It not merely might happen, but it will happen, if the radical wing of feminism continues to hold sway. They'll have blood on their hands, men's, women's, and children's.

Pretty sure "believe women" just means "don't dismiss accusations out of hand and actually investigate them". But I get that that doesn't really gel with this idea that feminism wants to take over the world.

I can assure you that from what i've seen from the Kavanaugh protests, that isn't what that means, sorry to say.

[New Mivango]

Notice that no one is addressing my points of about overuse of euphemisms, of hateful attitudes toward men, and of the dominance of the feminist movement by its radical wing. They're rather resort to ad hominem attacks on me instead. I'll take that as a small victory of sorts.

[Liriena]

We get it: your gender politics are fueled by fragility and resentment.

No fragility here, but there's plenty of resentment of the whole "drowning in male tears" attitude of the modern feminist movement, which is dominated by its extremists, not by its moderates, whose silence is complicity.

> "drowning in male tears"

so a years old meme that had already died off by the time some men decided they found it offensive

Also, if you think #MeToo and "male tears" are examples of feminist extremism, you are living in a bubble.

[New Mivango]

No fragility here, but there's plenty of resentment of the whole "drowning in male tears" attitude of the modern feminist movement, which is dominated by its extremists, not by its moderates, whose silence is complicity.

> "drowning in male tears"

so a years old meme that had already died off by the time some men decided they found it offensive

Also, if you think #MeToo and "male tears" are examples of feminist extremism, you are living in a bubble.

#MeToo's original purpose wasn't extremist. I never said that. But "believe women" runs antithetical to every precept of modern, Western, constitutional law, to due process, both substantive and procedural. And the way that "male tears" was popularized and condoned by even the moderates is truly sickening.

It should never be socially acceptable to be that callous as to think that "drowning" in anyone's tears, male or female, black or white, gay or straight or bi, is somehow cool.

[South Ccanda]

No fragility here, but there's plenty of resentment of the whole "drowning in male tears" attitude of the modern feminist movement, which is dominated by its extremists, not by its moderates, whose silence is complicity.

> "drowning in male tears"

so a years old meme that had already died off by the time some men decided they found it offensive

Also, if you think #MeToo and "male tears" are examples of feminist extremism, you are living in a bubble.

Well, #MeToo has been used in an extremist way, taking the Kavanaugh case into consideration. Its being abused.

[New Mivango]

Actually, I don't believe Kavanaugh as such, but I do believe that he thinks himself innocent. Hence the righteous indignation. I also believe that Dr. Ford thinks that he's guilty. Hence her sincere testimony. The problem is that none of us were there and can independently verify the activities that took place. I don't think that there would be enough to indict Kavanaugh on anything, but I do think that it's enough doubt that it should have kept him off the Supreme Court.

[Liriena]

> "drowning in male tears"

so a years old meme that had already died off by the time some men decided they found it offensive

Also, if you think #MeToo and "male tears" are examples of feminist extremism, you are living in a bubble.

Well, #MeToo has been used in an extremist way, taking the Kavanaugh case into consideration. Its being abused.

...how the hell was the Kavanaugh shit "extremist"? How was it "abused"?

The guy got accused, Senate and the FBI investigated, then the majority of the Senate arrived at the conclusion that he was innocent and confirmed him.

[Greater vakolicci haven]

If they just mean "don't dismiss women," that's what they should say. Saying "believe women," instead, along with saying "the future is female," doesn't exactly reduce misgivings and suspicion. Yes, as you might note, I acknowledge that moderate feminists do exist. They're just too cowardly to actually stand up to the extremists in their movement.

And yet you haven't offered anything beyond "this means this because I say so".

Okay.

'Believe women' is a dangerous trend because it runs contrary to the long-standing doctrine of due process. For best results, believe nobody, not at face value, accuser or accused. Nobody, male female straight gay whatever; nobody.
Believe, however, that they have alegations which due to the nature of such alegations must be taken seriously; believe also that again due to the nature of such alegations, we must be absolutely certain that they are correct in order to ruin someones life off of the back of them. That's how the law works, it's not always nice and sometimes bad people get off free; but what it is is necessary and what it is is the best that humans can do. How many of the people investigated in the aftermath of metoo have gone on to face charges? It's far less than the number of people investigated who had their lives ruined.

[New Mivango]

A more correct example of abuse was the Aziz Ansari case, along with the accusations against Al Franken, both of which failed to stand up to serious scrutiny, yet both men were virtually lynched in social media and Franken lost his Senate seat as a result, stabbed in the back by members of his own caucus.

Note: I will move Heaven and Earth to keep phony progressive Kirsten Gillibrand from achieving the Democratic nomination after the way that she stepped on Al Franken to try to ascend the political ladder. It was ice queen cold, truly evil.

[New Mivango]

And yet you haven't offered anything beyond "this means this because I say so".

Okay.

'Believe women' is a dangerous trend because it runs contrary to the long-standing doctrine of due process. For best results, believe nobody, not at face value, accuser or accused. Nobody, male female straight gay whatever; nobody.
Believe, however, that they have alegations which due to the nature of such alegations must be taken seriously; believe also that again due to the nature of such alegations, we must be absolutely certain that they are correct in order to ruin someones life off of the back of them. That's how the law works, it's not always nice and sometimes bad people get off free; but what it is is necessary and what it is is the best that humans can do. How many of the people investigated in the aftermath of metoo have gone on to face charges? It's far less than the number of people investigated who had their lives ruined.

My sentiments exactly. Let the process run its proper course and let the chips fall where they may.

[Liriena]

> "drowning in male tears"

so a years old meme that had already died off by the time some men decided they found it offensive

Also, if you think #MeToo and "male tears" are examples of feminist extremism, you are living in a bubble.

#MeToo's original purpose wasn't extremist. I never said that. But "believe women" runs antithetical to every precept of modern, Western, constitutional law, to due process, both substantive and procedural. And the way that "male tears" was popularized and condoned by even the moderates is truly sickening.

It should never be socially acceptable to be that callous as to think that "drowning" in anyone's tears, male or female, black or white, gay or straight or bi, is somehow cool.

"Believe women" was not an attack on "Western" values. If anything, it was an attack on something that was and still is fundamentally broken about "Western" values, which is a widespread institutional reluctance to fully investigate sexual violence.

Also, nothing inherently sickening about memes based on righteous schadenfreude, specially if it comes into being as a response by a marginalized group to the insecurities of a more powerful group.

[Liriena]

A more correct example of abuse was the Aziz Ansari case, along with the accusations against Al Franken, both of which failed to stand up to serious scrutiny, yet both men were virtually lynched in social media and Franken lost his Senate seat as a result, stabbed in the back by members of his own caucus.

Franken was literally caught on camera groping a sleeping woman.

[New Mivango]

#MeToo's original purpose wasn't extremist. I never said that. But "believe women" runs antithetical to every precept of modern, Western, constitutional law, to due process, both substantive and procedural. And the way that "male tears" was popularized and condoned by even the moderates is truly sickening.

It should never be socially acceptable to be that callous as to think that "drowning" in anyone's tears, male or female, black or white, gay or straight or bi, is somehow cool.

"Believe women" was not an attack on "Western" values. If anything, it was an attack on something that was and still is fundamentally broken about "Western" values, which is a widespread institutional reluctance to fully investigate sexual violence.

Also, nothing inherently sickening about memes based on righteous schadenfreude, specially if it comes into being as a response by a marginalized group to the insecurities of a more powerful group.

So, you can be callous against men and they should just suck it up, because they're men, and that's not sexist or extremist or sickening? Gotcha. All are equal, but some are more equal than others. Yeah, you're the poster child for everything that is wrong in modern feminism, that much is clear.

[Vassenor]

Pretty sure "believe women" just means "don't dismiss accusations out of hand and actually investigate them". But I get that that doesn't really gel with this idea that feminism wants to take over the world.

I can assure you that from what i've seen from the Kavanaugh protests, that isn't what that means, sorry to say.

You mean that thing where everyone had to fight tooth and nail to even get to "don't dismiss accusations out of hand and actually investigate them"?

[New Mivango]

A more correct example of abuse was the Aziz Ansari case, along with the accusations against Al Franken, both of which failed to stand up to serious scrutiny, yet both men were virtually lynched in social media and Franken lost his Senate seat as a result, stabbed in the back by members of his own caucus.

Franken was literally caught on camera groping a sleeping woman.

From what I understand, that was a gag of sorts and the woman was in on it.