How is it too much to ask that a SCOTUS judge not have sexual assault accusations against them that very well could be true?? Especially when the resistance to actually figuring out if they are true is so strong?
My God, the standards that some people apply to people for such positions are at an all time low.
And it shocks me that people would allow Kavanagh "losing his dream job" to be a legitimate concern. This position Trump is trying to put him in is so far beyond that. At the end of the day, a SCOTUS judge nominee needs to be beyond reproach, and we all know that Kavanaugh is not, even if this allegation is false... which I doubt. People seem to overestimating the chances of a woman putting herself in the position this woman is currently in. Please, someone give me any motive on her part that justifies it.
because in the current climate, many people think that every accusation is credible, no matter what. the overwhelming majority are credible, but that's not 100%, especially where politics are concerned.
the resistance is so strong because of the timing of the vote. there's a lot on the line for both parties. potentially decades worth of law making that could tip to one side or the other, and if it makes all the difference in the world if the vote happens before or after the mid-terms. so you can see why people are skeptical about the motivations on BOTH sides.
as far as we know right now, no, there is no motive on her part to go through what she's going through. but what if we found one out later, like piles of cash in an offshore account, but it was too late and this man's life is ruined?
now, after what we are hearing from other women and Avenatti, it's unlikely that this is untrue. But I'd like to know what, in your opinion, makes one sexual assault allegation credible and one not credible? is it motive for coming forward alone?
explain to me, if you will, how exactly his life would be ruined by not getting THIS lifetime appointment when he already has one? If its reputation , thats something that can be repaired wth contrition or if tge accusations are false, once the truth is revealed.
what he potentially goes through will fall far far far short of what these women will be forced to endure for speaking up.
I don't know, I just tend to think that sexual crimes reported on at the national/international level would suck pretty bad. And how is the truth revealed in a case of wrongful accusations of this nature? it's like proving there is no god. unless the accuser admits to lying, there is no "truth will come out".
I hate having to say this so often, but it seems to be necessary: I'm not defending this guy. I'm guessing he did what she is accusing him of.
But it just seems to me that no one gives a fuck if she's lying. it's "oh well, he's still a judge, men have been assholes for centuries, so if this one is collateral damage, so be it". I just think that's a dangerous road to go down.
Exactly how I feel. If proven to be untrue, it will be talked about for 15 minutes then forgotten. And he will always be known as the judge who didn't get nominated for this. If true I don't feel bad for him at all, but if not, this would be horrible to go through. Yes, abused women had to endure much worse, but that doesn't have anything to do with railroading someone. I don't get the attitude of "o well, he's already a judge so whats the harm." I agree it is a dangerous road.
I have no clue why you think proven false accusations would be talked about for 15 minutes and then forgotten.
But in any case, yup, someone getting hurt by false allegations is horrible. I ABSOLUTELY care about such instances... But I'm not sure what in the world people want here. At this moment there is no reason at all to assume they are false accusations, but the possibility of them being false is the MAIN topic of conversation. If these are not false accusations, which is much more likely than the reverse, that's way, way, WAY more disgusting than Kavanaugh not getting this SCOTUS seat.
So what exactly are you looking for here?? Is there some third option that I'm not aware of, in a dimension where life is always fair?
I'm not sure how what mace said could actually be debated. it would absolutely be yesterday's news in a very quick fashion.
no reason at all? even the accuser wants an FBI investigation. of course the possibility of the accusations being false is the main topic. that's how "innocent until proven guilty" works.
do I believe her? yes. but I'm open to the slight possibility there is something else at play here. however minute.
it's pretty clear you actually don't care about false accusations, by how flippant you are about the consequences of such.
The chances of the accusations being made up are next to zero (around 4%). So statistically, I'm not too concerned with Kavanaugh.
Research for the Home Office suggests that only 4 per cent of cases of sexual violence reported to the UK police are found or suspected to be false. Studies carried out in Europe and in the US indicate rates of between 2 per cent and 6 per cent.
This is why I wondered by everyone is practically obsessed with the idea that these accusations may very well be false. I see that as highly unlikely. Yes, it's possible. But since there is almost no way they could even be proven false anyhow, and since the chances of them being false are slim and getting slimmer by the day, I find it odd that so many are kind of acting like it's a really strong possibility, to the point where they are obviously much more concerned about this possibility and how it will impact the nominee than they are about the much more likely possibility: that the accusers are telling the truth and the POTUS is straight up calling the victims liars simply because he doesn't feel like believing them.
So how many stories and accusations do people need here? 3 clearly isn't enough... 5? 7? 19, like Trump has? Nope, even 19 isn't enough, apparently!
Oh please.
Oh please what?
Yeah 3, 4, 5, 19 accusations aren’t enough. You are making some sort of weird drama here.
What are you talking about? Trump has 19 accusers and he was elected POTUS. Kavanaugh has 3 accusers now, and many people still seem to think the chances of them all being false are high. I'm not being dramatic - these are facts. If you want to point at weird dramas, turn on the news man. I'm sure as hell not creating them!
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
I have to laugh at all the white men here who are practically shaking in their boots at the idea that things might shift away from the outrageous advantage they've had for literally thousands of years. If I don't laugh, I'll be grinding my teeth.
So, Team Trump Treason, the trice married, multiple extramartial affair having, pussy grabbing POTUS, child molesting senate candidate endorser, whose Director of Communications, Jason Miller, during the campaign, has been accused of impregnating his mistress and giving her an abortion inducing pill, sending her to the emergency room, whose Supreme Court nominee is defended in the Senate confirmation hearings by Senator Chuck Grassley, whose Director of Communications resigned because of sexual harrassment allegations and who knew prevously to the second woman coming forward with her allegation, that she was out there, waiting to come forward, tried to rush the confirmation vote and some on here are doubting the women's stories as they relate to Kavanaugh and believe they may be false allegations? Do I have that right? Laughable.
How is it too much to ask that a SCOTUS judge not have sexual assault accusations against them that very well could be true?? Especially when the resistance to actually figuring out if they are true is so strong?
My God, the standards that some people apply to people for such positions are at an all time low.
And it shocks me that people would allow Kavanagh "losing his dream job" to be a legitimate concern. This position Trump is trying to put him in is so far beyond that. At the end of the day, a SCOTUS judge nominee needs to be beyond reproach, and we all know that Kavanaugh is not, even if this allegation is false... which I doubt. People seem to overestimating the chances of a woman putting herself in the position this woman is currently in. Please, someone give me any motive on her part that justifies it.
because in the current climate, many people think that every accusation is credible, no matter what. the overwhelming majority are credible, but that's not 100%, especially where politics are concerned.
the resistance is so strong because of the timing of the vote. there's a lot on the line for both parties. potentially decades worth of law making that could tip to one side or the other, and if it makes all the difference in the world if the vote happens before or after the mid-terms. so you can see why people are skeptical about the motivations on BOTH sides.
as far as we know right now, no, there is no motive on her part to go through what she's going through. but what if we found one out later, like piles of cash in an offshore account, but it was too late and this man's life is ruined?
now, after what we are hearing from other women and Avenatti, it's unlikely that this is untrue. But I'd like to know what, in your opinion, makes one sexual assault allegation credible and one not credible? is it motive for coming forward alone?
explain to me, if you will, how exactly his life would be ruined by not getting THIS lifetime appointment when he already has one? If its reputation , thats something that can be repaired wth contrition or if tge accusations are false, once the truth is revealed.
what he potentially goes through will fall far far far short of what these women will be forced to endure for speaking up.
I don't know, I just tend to think that sexual crimes reported on at the national/international level would suck pretty bad. And how is the truth revealed in a case of wrongful accusations of this nature? it's like proving there is no god. unless the accuser admits to lying, there is no "truth will come out".
I hate having to say this so often, but it seems to be necessary: I'm not defending this guy. I'm guessing he did what she is accusing him of.
But it just seems to me that no one gives a fuck if she's lying. it's "oh well, he's still a judge, men have been assholes for centuries, so if this one is collateral damage, so be it". I just think that's a dangerous road to go down.
Exactly how I feel. If proven to be untrue, it will be talked about for 15 minutes then forgotten. And he will always be known as the judge who didn't get nominated for this. If true I don't feel bad for him at all, but if not, this would be horrible to go through. Yes, abused women had to endure much worse, but that doesn't have anything to do with railroading someone. I don't get the attitude of "o well, he's already a judge so whats the harm." I agree it is a dangerous road.
I have no clue why you think proven false accusations would be talked about for 15 minutes and then forgotten.
But in any case, yup, someone getting hurt by false allegations is horrible. I ABSOLUTELY care about such instances... But I'm not sure what in the world people want here. At this moment there is no reason at all to assume they are false accusations, but the possibility of them being false is the MAIN topic of conversation. If these are not false accusations, which is much more likely than the reverse, that's way, way, WAY more disgusting than Kavanaugh not getting this SCOTUS seat.
So what exactly are you looking for here?? Is there some third option that I'm not aware of, in a dimension where life is always fair?
I'm not sure how what mace said could actually be debated. it would absolutely be yesterday's news in a very quick fashion.
no reason at all? even the accuser wants an FBI investigation. of course the possibility of the accusations being false is the main topic. that's how "innocent until proven guilty" works.
do I believe her? yes. but I'm open to the slight possibility there is something else at play here. however minute.
it's pretty clear you actually don't care about false accusations, by how flippant you are about the consequences of such.
The chances of the accusations being made up are next to zero (around 4%). So statistically, I'm not too concerned with Kavanaugh.
Research for the Home Office suggests that only 4 per cent of cases of sexual violence reported to the UK police are found or suspected to be false. Studies carried out in Europe and in the US indicate rates of between 2 per cent and 6 per cent.
This is why I wondered by everyone is practically obsessed with the idea that these accusations may very well be false. I see that as highly unlikely. Yes, it's possible. But since there is almost no way they could even be proven false anyhow, and since the chances of them being false are slim and getting slimmer by the day, I find it odd that so many are kind of acting like it's a really strong possibility, to the point where they are obviously much more concerned about this possibility and how it will impact the nominee than they are about the much more likely possibility: that the accusers are telling the truth and the POTUS is straight up calling the victims liars simply because he doesn't feel like believing them.
So how many stories and accusations do people need here? 3 clearly isn't enough... 5? 7? 19, like Trump has? Nope, even 19 isn't enough, apparently!
I haven't been F5-ing my twitter feed, so I'm not aware of 3. I was aware of two, the second of which wasn't even sure that kavanaugh was the one who exposed himself to her or if it was someone else.
2 named, plus Avanettis client. #basta
"Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
So, Team Trump Treason, the trice married, multiple extramartial affair having, pussy grabbing POTUS, child molesting senate candidate endorser, whose Director of Communications, Jason Miller, during the campaign, has been accused of impregnating his mistress and giving her an abortion inducing pill, sending her to the emergency room, whose Supreme Court nominee is defended in the Senate confirmation hearings by Senator Chuck Grassley, whose Director of Communications resigned because of sexual harrassment allegations and who knew prevously to the second woman coming forward with her allegation, that she was out there, waiting to come forward, tried to rush the confirmation vote and some on here are doubting the women's stories as they relate to Kavanaugh and believe they may be false allegations? Do I have that right? Laughable.
Yeah, that's about the short of it!
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
I have to laugh at all the white men here who are practically shaking in their boots at the idea that things might shift away from the outrageous advantage they've had for literally thousands of years. If I don't laugh, I'll be grinding my teeth.
Who is shaking in their boots?
im already starting the #meneither movement. For any guy that has never come even close to anything like it seems some of these creeps have been doing.
How is it too much to ask that a SCOTUS judge not have sexual assault accusations against them that very well could be true?? Especially when the resistance to actually figuring out if they are true is so strong?
My God, the standards that some people apply to people for such positions are at an all time low.
And it shocks me that people would allow Kavanagh "losing his dream job" to be a legitimate concern. This position Trump is trying to put him in is so far beyond that. At the end of the day, a SCOTUS judge nominee needs to be beyond reproach, and we all know that Kavanaugh is not, even if this allegation is false... which I doubt. People seem to overestimating the chances of a woman putting herself in the position this woman is currently in. Please, someone give me any motive on her part that justifies it.
because in the current climate, many people think that every accusation is credible, no matter what. the overwhelming majority are credible, but that's not 100%, especially where politics are concerned.
the resistance is so strong because of the timing of the vote. there's a lot on the line for both parties. potentially decades worth of law making that could tip to one side or the other, and if it makes all the difference in the world if the vote happens before or after the mid-terms. so you can see why people are skeptical about the motivations on BOTH sides.
as far as we know right now, no, there is no motive on her part to go through what she's going through. but what if we found one out later, like piles of cash in an offshore account, but it was too late and this man's life is ruined?
now, after what we are hearing from other women and Avenatti, it's unlikely that this is untrue. But I'd like to know what, in your opinion, makes one sexual assault allegation credible and one not credible? is it motive for coming forward alone?
explain to me, if you will, how exactly his life would be ruined by not getting THIS lifetime appointment when he already has one? If its reputation , thats something that can be repaired wth contrition or if tge accusations are false, once the truth is revealed.
what he potentially goes through will fall far far far short of what these women will be forced to endure for speaking up.
I don't know, I just tend to think that sexual crimes reported on at the national/international level would suck pretty bad. And how is the truth revealed in a case of wrongful accusations of this nature? it's like proving there is no god. unless the accuser admits to lying, there is no "truth will come out".
I hate having to say this so often, but it seems to be necessary: I'm not defending this guy. I'm guessing he did what she is accusing him of.
But it just seems to me that no one gives a fuck if she's lying. it's "oh well, he's still a judge, men have been assholes for centuries, so if this one is collateral damage, so be it". I just think that's a dangerous road to go down.
Exactly how I feel. If proven to be untrue, it will be talked about for 15 minutes then forgotten. And he will always be known as the judge who didn't get nominated for this. If true I don't feel bad for him at all, but if not, this would be horrible to go through. Yes, abused women had to endure much worse, but that doesn't have anything to do with railroading someone. I don't get the attitude of "o well, he's already a judge so whats the harm." I agree it is a dangerous road.
I have no clue why you think proven false accusations would be talked about for 15 minutes and then forgotten.
But in any case, yup, someone getting hurt by false allegations is horrible. I ABSOLUTELY care about such instances... But I'm not sure what in the world people want here. At this moment there is no reason at all to assume they are false accusations, but the possibility of them being false is the MAIN topic of conversation. If these are not false accusations, which is much more likely than the reverse, that's way, way, WAY more disgusting than Kavanaugh not getting this SCOTUS seat.
So what exactly are you looking for here?? Is there some third option that I'm not aware of, in a dimension where life is always fair?
I'm not sure how what mace said could actually be debated. it would absolutely be yesterday's news in a very quick fashion.
no reason at all? even the accuser wants an FBI investigation. of course the possibility of the accusations being false is the main topic. that's how "innocent until proven guilty" works.
do I believe her? yes. but I'm open to the slight possibility there is something else at play here. however minute.
it's pretty clear you actually don't care about false accusations, by how flippant you are about the consequences of such.
Well you're 100% wrong about where I stand about false allegations. I don't know why you're literally calling me a liar right now.
How is it “100% wrong”. You already said the accusations were enough.
He's 100% wrong because I do care about false allegations. Obviously. FFS, my own mother has been the victim of false allegations as a teacher. I care. He's 100% wrong.
The accusations in this specific situations are enough to disqualify the SCOTUS nominee, unless the allegations are actually proven false. That is what I said. That doesn't at all say that I don't care about false allegations.
So even if false, the accusations are enough to keep this person from getting the job...but you care about false accusations. Just not those against Supreme Court justices? Which other jobs?
I think I understand your opinion now but I disagree 100%.
My entire point is that these particular allegations won't be proven false (even if they are, which is unlikely, but still). Given that, there is simply no other option in this case, and yes, that is partly because of the specific position he's been nominated for, especially since it's a lifelong assignment. What other option do you see?? Him being a SCOTUS judge for the rest of his life while accusations that have not been proven false persist?? How is it possible that anyone sees that as the better of the two options here?? I think anyone comfortable with that specifically believes that the accusations are false. So far nobody has any reason to believe that. And I can't imagine they will ever find that reason.
My perspective on this is actually really objective. There are 2 options, neither good. One option is much safer than the other.
I would describe it as, the burden of proof isn't the same as it is in a criminal case (beyond a reasonable doubt). In fact, I'm not even sure it is preponderance of the evidence (civil standard). If what either of the two accusers is credible and reasonably possible that it occurred, I believe it should be disqualifying from SCOTUS. It is a lifetime job and one should be free from any hint of impropriety. That's not too much to ask. No one is saying he should lose his spot on the DC Circuit. This won't wreck his life.
How is it too much to ask that a SCOTUS judge not have sexual assault accusations against them that very well could be true?? Especially when the resistance to actually figuring out if they are true is so strong?
My God, the standards that some people apply to people for such positions are at an all time low.
And it shocks me that people would allow Kavanagh "losing his dream job" to be a legitimate concern. This position Trump is trying to put him in is so far beyond that. At the end of the day, a SCOTUS judge nominee needs to be beyond reproach, and we all know that Kavanaugh is not, even if this allegation is false... which I doubt. People seem to overestimating the chances of a woman putting herself in the position this woman is currently in. Please, someone give me any motive on her part that justifies it.
because in the current climate, many people think that every accusation is credible, no matter what. the overwhelming majority are credible, but that's not 100%, especially where politics are concerned.
the resistance is so strong because of the timing of the vote. there's a lot on the line for both parties. potentially decades worth of law making that could tip to one side or the other, and if it makes all the difference in the world if the vote happens before or after the mid-terms. so you can see why people are skeptical about the motivations on BOTH sides.
as far as we know right now, no, there is no motive on her part to go through what she's going through. but what if we found one out later, like piles of cash in an offshore account, but it was too late and this man's life is ruined?
now, after what we are hearing from other women and Avenatti, it's unlikely that this is untrue. But I'd like to know what, in your opinion, makes one sexual assault allegation credible and one not credible? is it motive for coming forward alone?
explain to me, if you will, how exactly his life would be ruined by not getting THIS lifetime appointment when he already has one? If its reputation , thats something that can be repaired wth contrition or if tge accusations are false, once the truth is revealed.
what he potentially goes through will fall far far far short of what these women will be forced to endure for speaking up.
I don't know, I just tend to think that sexual crimes reported on at the national/international level would suck pretty bad. And how is the truth revealed in a case of wrongful accusations of this nature? it's like proving there is no god. unless the accuser admits to lying, there is no "truth will come out".
I hate having to say this so often, but it seems to be necessary: I'm not defending this guy. I'm guessing he did what she is accusing him of.
But it just seems to me that no one gives a fuck if she's lying. it's "oh well, he's still a judge, men have been assholes for centuries, so if this one is collateral damage, so be it". I just think that's a dangerous road to go down.
Exactly how I feel. If proven to be untrue, it will be talked about for 15 minutes then forgotten. And he will always be known as the judge who didn't get nominated for this. If true I don't feel bad for him at all, but if not, this would be horrible to go through. Yes, abused women had to endure much worse, but that doesn't have anything to do with railroading someone. I don't get the attitude of "o well, he's already a judge so whats the harm." I agree it is a dangerous road.
I have no clue why you think proven false accusations would be talked about for 15 minutes and then forgotten.
But in any case, yup, someone getting hurt by false allegations is horrible. I ABSOLUTELY care about such instances... But I'm not sure what in the world people want here. At this moment there is no reason at all to assume they are false accusations, but the possibility of them being false is the MAIN topic of conversation. If these are not false accusations, which is much more likely than the reverse, that's way, way, WAY more disgusting than Kavanaugh not getting this SCOTUS seat.
So what exactly are you looking for here?? Is there some third option that I'm not aware of, in a dimension where life is always fair?
I'm not sure how what mace said could actually be debated. it would absolutely be yesterday's news in a very quick fashion.
no reason at all? even the accuser wants an FBI investigation. of course the possibility of the accusations being false is the main topic. that's how "innocent until proven guilty" works.
do I believe her? yes. but I'm open to the slight possibility there is something else at play here. however minute.
it's pretty clear you actually don't care about false accusations, by how flippant you are about the consequences of such.
The chances of the accusations being made up are next to zero (around 4%). So statistically, I'm not too concerned with Kavanaugh.
Research for the Home Office suggests that only 4 per cent of cases of sexual violence reported to the UK police are found or suspected to be false. Studies carried out in Europe and in the US indicate rates of between 2 per cent and 6 per cent.
This is why I wondered by everyone is practically obsessed with the idea that these accusations may very well be false. I see that as highly unlikely. Yes, it's possible. But since there is almost no way they could even be proven false anyhow, and since the chances of them being false are slim and getting slimmer by the day, I find it odd that so many are kind of acting like it's a really strong possibility, to the point where they are obviously much more concerned about this possibility and how it will impact the nominee than they are about the much more likely possibility: that the accusers are telling the truth and the POTUS is straight up calling the victims liars simply because he doesn't feel like believing them.
So how many stories and accusations do people need here? 3 clearly isn't enough... 5? 7? 19, like Trump has? Nope, even 19 isn't enough, apparently!
Oh please.
Oh please what?
Yeah 3, 4, 5, 19 accusations aren’t enough. You are making some sort of weird drama here.
What are you talking about? Trump has 19 accusers and he was elected POTUS. Kavanaugh has 3 accusers now, and many people still seem to think the chances of them all being false are high. I'm not being dramatic - these are facts. If you want to point at weird dramas, turn on the news man. I'm sure as hell not creating them!
I hadn't heard until your post about a 3rd. not sure how "many people still seem to think...." can apply to such new information.
"every society honours its live conformists and its dead troublemakers"
So, Team Trump Treason, the trice married, multiple extramartial affair having, pussy grabbing POTUS, child molesting senate candidate endorser, whose Director of Communications, Jason Miller, during the campaign, has been accused of impregnating his mistress and giving her an abortion inducing pill, sending her to the emergency room, whose Supreme Court nominee is defended in the Senate confirmation hearings by Senator Chuck Grassley, whose Director of Communications resigned because of sexual harrassment allegations and who knew prevously to the second woman coming forward with her allegation, that she was out there, waiting to come forward, tried to rush the confirmation vote and some on here are doubting the women's stories as they relate to Kavanaugh and believe they may be false allegations? Do I have that right? Laughable.
No, some of us are trying to deal in fact and want an investigation. Not taking a side without information, unlike many others it seems.
i personally lean to this being true. But my opinion doesn’t matter.
I have to laugh at all the white men here who are practically shaking in their boots at the idea that things might shift away from the outrageous advantage they've had for literally thousands of years. If I don't laugh, I'll be grinding my teeth.
Who is shaking in their boots?
im already starting the #meneither movement. For any guy that has never come even close to anything like it seems some of these creeps have been doing.
Fair enough! .... Though FWIW, and this is not at all directed at you... I know several men who would join the #meneither movement when they have no right to. I'm not really making a point... I'm just saying that I know for a FACT that there are plenty of men who have been guilty of sexual assault, misconduct, or harassment who will swear up and down and sideways that they have never done a thing wrong. I'm pretty sure a lot of them really believe it too.
That said, of COURSE there are men who genuinely haven't. I guess my main point is that if you're starting such a movement, think real hard about how you plan on weeding out the many men who will join but have no business doing so.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
I have to laugh at all the white men here who are practically shaking in their boots at the idea that things might shift away from the outrageous advantage they've had for literally thousands of years. If I don't laugh, I'll be grinding my teeth.
Who is shaking in their boots?
im already starting the #meneither movement. For any guy that has never come even close to anything like it seems some of these creeps have been doing.
The situation that Avenetti describes absolutely happens and it happened at my school, and a party that I was at when I was 16. I remember it like yesterday. It's not normal, it wasn't boys being boys back in the 80's. We probably didn't think about it as 'rape' back then, but only those without a moral compass would think it was okay.
So, Team Trump Treason, the trice married, multiple extramartial affair having, pussy grabbing POTUS, child molesting senate candidate endorser, whose Director of Communications, Jason Miller, during the campaign, has been accused of impregnating his mistress and giving her an abortion inducing pill, sending her to the emergency room, whose Supreme Court nominee is defended in the Senate confirmation hearings by Senator Chuck Grassley, whose Director of Communications resigned because of sexual harrassment allegations and who knew prevously to the second woman coming forward with her allegation, that she was out there, waiting to come forward, tried to rush the confirmation vote and some on here are doubting the women's stories as they relate to Kavanaugh and believe they may be false allegations? Do I have that right? Laughable.
no, you don't have that right. laughable.
"every society honours its live conformists and its dead troublemakers"
How is it too much to ask that a SCOTUS judge not have sexual assault accusations against them that very well could be true?? Especially when the resistance to actually figuring out if they are true is so strong?
My God, the standards that some people apply to people for such positions are at an all time low.
And it shocks me that people would allow Kavanagh "losing his dream job" to be a legitimate concern. This position Trump is trying to put him in is so far beyond that. At the end of the day, a SCOTUS judge nominee needs to be beyond reproach, and we all know that Kavanaugh is not, even if this allegation is false... which I doubt. People seem to overestimating the chances of a woman putting herself in the position this woman is currently in. Please, someone give me any motive on her part that justifies it.
because in the current climate, many people think that every accusation is credible, no matter what. the overwhelming majority are credible, but that's not 100%, especially where politics are concerned.
the resistance is so strong because of the timing of the vote. there's a lot on the line for both parties. potentially decades worth of law making that could tip to one side or the other, and if it makes all the difference in the world if the vote happens before or after the mid-terms. so you can see why people are skeptical about the motivations on BOTH sides.
as far as we know right now, no, there is no motive on her part to go through what she's going through. but what if we found one out later, like piles of cash in an offshore account, but it was too late and this man's life is ruined?
now, after what we are hearing from other women and Avenatti, it's unlikely that this is untrue. But I'd like to know what, in your opinion, makes one sexual assault allegation credible and one not credible? is it motive for coming forward alone?
explain to me, if you will, how exactly his life would be ruined by not getting THIS lifetime appointment when he already has one? If its reputation , thats something that can be repaired wth contrition or if tge accusations are false, once the truth is revealed.
what he potentially goes through will fall far far far short of what these women will be forced to endure for speaking up.
I don't know, I just tend to think that sexual crimes reported on at the national/international level would suck pretty bad. And how is the truth revealed in a case of wrongful accusations of this nature? it's like proving there is no god. unless the accuser admits to lying, there is no "truth will come out".
I hate having to say this so often, but it seems to be necessary: I'm not defending this guy. I'm guessing he did what she is accusing him of.
But it just seems to me that no one gives a fuck if she's lying. it's "oh well, he's still a judge, men have been assholes for centuries, so if this one is collateral damage, so be it". I just think that's a dangerous road to go down.
I, for one, DON'T really give a fuck. On a personal level, yeah, I do. But on a broader, philosophical and societal level...nope don't give a fuck. This guy is the epitome of white privilege and advantage. As I mentioned earlier in the thread, none of these accusations are "ruining lives". They are ending the careers of men who have made enough money to live comfortably for generations. I find it hard to care if their reputation takes a hit when they belong to elite societies that will never truly abandon them.
You talk about a dangerous road to go down... What about the dangerous road we've been down for the last few thousand years? The dangerous road where women are raped and then are damn lucky just to avoid punishment and blame for their own victimisation, let alone see justice. We have been on this dangerous road for eons and if we take a different road that's dangerous for the previous benefactors...well...I just don't have many fucks to give.
the goal here shouldn't be to swing all the way the other way. the goal should be to end up in the middle.
I thought justice was supposed to be blind, not "blind unless he's white and rich".
This statement really illustrates the insane level of bias that western society builds into men. First of all, you and the other nervous males are really mixing and matching the meaning of the word justice. There is a stark difference between legal justice and "what people think ought to be right" and you have been blurring that line. On that note... "swing all the way the other way"??? Are you fucking joking? There are tens of thousands of untested rape kits sitting around in America. THAT is one side. According to you the other side "all the way the other way" is a handful of millionaire celebrities who had to quit their jobs and a nominee to the highest appointed moral authority in the free world having to just remain in his already eminent position.
Don't you see how insulting that is? This entire conversation is a slap in the face.
not all of us have our pitchforks at the ready based solely on political affiliation.
I don't know what political affiliation has to do with Halifax's last comment. Those things listed are true. I actually don't understand where you're coming from right now HFD. What are you defending exactly? What are you disagreeing with?
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
I have to laugh at all the white men here who are practically shaking in their boots at the idea that things might shift away from the outrageous advantage they've had for literally thousands of years. If I don't laugh, I'll be grinding my teeth.
Who is shaking in their boots?
im already starting the #meneither movement. For any guy that has never come even close to anything like it seems some of these creeps have been doing.
not all of us have our pitchforks at the ready based solely on political affiliation.
There are probably at least 10 conservative judges without the history or baggage of Kavanaugh and could have been nominated but were not. Are you not the company you keep? The Team Trump Treason Administration is a train wreck and some on here want to believe Kavanaugh is somehow “different” than the main players in this train wreck? Laughable.
A joke about trying to get out in front of a perceived imminent witch-hunt sure seems to confirm that you are indeed shaking in your boots about the perceived imminent witch-hunt. Jokes don't come from a vacuum.
I have to laugh at all the white men here who are practically shaking in their boots at the idea that things might shift away from the outrageous advantage they've had for literally thousands of years. If I don't laugh, I'll be grinding my teeth.
Who is shaking in their boots?
im already starting the #meneither movement. For any guy that has never come even close to anything like it seems some of these creeps have been doing.
You are, and #meneither proves it lol
A joke proves I'm a closet sexual assaulter just waiting to be caught? Get out of here.
not all of us have our pitchforks at the ready based solely on political affiliation.
There are probably at least 10 conservative judges without the history or baggage of Kavanaugh and could have been nominated but were not. Are you not the company you keep? The Team Trump Treason Administration is a train wreck and some on here want to believe Kavanaugh is somehow “different” than the main players in this train wreck? Laughable.
I agree. Roberts didn't have these problems, neither did Alito. Clarence Thomas obviously did, so it's clear this isn't just a recency issue, spurred by metoo.
How is it too much to ask that a SCOTUS judge not have sexual assault accusations against them that very well could be true?? Especially when the resistance to actually figuring out if they are true is so strong?
My God, the standards that some people apply to people for such positions are at an all time low.
And it shocks me that people would allow Kavanagh "losing his dream job" to be a legitimate concern. This position Trump is trying to put him in is so far beyond that. At the end of the day, a SCOTUS judge nominee needs to be beyond reproach, and we all know that Kavanaugh is not, even if this allegation is false... which I doubt. People seem to overestimating the chances of a woman putting herself in the position this woman is currently in. Please, someone give me any motive on her part that justifies it.
because in the current climate, many people think that every accusation is credible, no matter what. the overwhelming majority are credible, but that's not 100%, especially where politics are concerned.
the resistance is so strong because of the timing of the vote. there's a lot on the line for both parties. potentially decades worth of law making that could tip to one side or the other, and if it makes all the difference in the world if the vote happens before or after the mid-terms. so you can see why people are skeptical about the motivations on BOTH sides.
as far as we know right now, no, there is no motive on her part to go through what she's going through. but what if we found one out later, like piles of cash in an offshore account, but it was too late and this man's life is ruined?
now, after what we are hearing from other women and Avenatti, it's unlikely that this is untrue. But I'd like to know what, in your opinion, makes one sexual assault allegation credible and one not credible? is it motive for coming forward alone?
explain to me, if you will, how exactly his life would be ruined by not getting THIS lifetime appointment when he already has one? If its reputation , thats something that can be repaired wth contrition or if tge accusations are false, once the truth is revealed.
what he potentially goes through will fall far far far short of what these women will be forced to endure for speaking up.
I don't know, I just tend to think that sexual crimes reported on at the national/international level would suck pretty bad. And how is the truth revealed in a case of wrongful accusations of this nature? it's like proving there is no god. unless the accuser admits to lying, there is no "truth will come out".
I hate having to say this so often, but it seems to be necessary: I'm not defending this guy. I'm guessing he did what she is accusing him of.
But it just seems to me that no one gives a fuck if she's lying. it's "oh well, he's still a judge, men have been assholes for centuries, so if this one is collateral damage, so be it". I just think that's a dangerous road to go down.
Exactly how I feel. If proven to be untrue, it will be talked about for 15 minutes then forgotten. And he will always be known as the judge who didn't get nominated for this. If true I don't feel bad for him at all, but if not, this would be horrible to go through. Yes, abused women had to endure much worse, but that doesn't have anything to do with railroading someone. I don't get the attitude of "o well, he's already a judge so whats the harm." I agree it is a dangerous road.
I have no clue why you think proven false accusations would be talked about for 15 minutes and then forgotten.
But in any case, yup, someone getting hurt by false allegations is horrible. I ABSOLUTELY care about such instances... But I'm not sure what in the world people want here. At this moment there is no reason at all to assume they are false accusations, but the possibility of them being false is the MAIN topic of conversation. If these are not false accusations, which is much more likely than the reverse, that's way, way, WAY more disgusting than Kavanaugh not getting this SCOTUS seat.
So what exactly are you looking for here?? Is there some third option that I'm not aware of, in a dimension where life is always fair?
I do see a third option. Camp A: It seems many have the side of he's been accused, that is enough to disqualify him. Camp B: Another camp is this was long, he was young, its been almost 40 years, let him be a judge.
I actually think Camp B is uncommon. Although that has been cited constantly by those who want him disqualifies, very few are actually saying that. Far more are what I consider Camp C: delay a vote until a hearing takes places and testimony if weighed and the facts are researched. Then decide if he is qualified. I don't think you need the same level of evidence that a criminal case needs to disqualify him, far less. But many seem to want to skip that phase and go straight to disqualifying.
And yes, I do think if they are proven untrue it will make far less news than what it already has. Not even close.
not all of us have our pitchforks at the ready based solely on political affiliation.
There are probably at least 10 conservative judges without the history or baggage of Kavanaugh and could have been nominated but were not. Are you not the company you keep? The Team Trump Treason Administration is a train wreck and some on here want to believe Kavanaugh is somehow “different” than the main players in this train wreck? Laughable.
But would they stand up for Trumpelidumpeli?
"Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
I have to laugh at all the white men here who are practically shaking in their boots at the idea that things might shift away from the outrageous advantage they've had for literally thousands of years. If I don't laugh, I'll be grinding my teeth.
Who is shaking in their boots?
im already starting the #meneither movement. For any guy that has never come even close to anything like it seems some of these creeps have been doing.
You are, and #meneither proves it lol
A joke proves I'm a closet sexual assaulter just waiting to be caught? Get out of here.
I have to laugh at all the white men here who are practically shaking in their boots at the idea that things might shift away from the outrageous advantage they've had for literally thousands of years. If I don't laugh, I'll be grinding my teeth.
Who is shaking in their boots?
im already starting the #meneither movement. For any guy that has never come even close to anything like it seems some of these creeps have been doing.
You are, and #meneither proves it lol
A joke proves I'm a closet sexual assaulter just waiting to be caught? Get out of here.
No no, that is not what I meant and I apologize if that's what it seems like I was saying. What I was trying to convey is that men everywhere are quaking in their boots at the prospect of losing their privilege. For the first time EVER women are just barely occasionally being believed over men, and that is being conflated (by pathetic fear) into this doom and gloom of a dangerous road where men's lives will just be "ruined" by accusations made willy nilly by capricious women.
How is it too much to ask that a SCOTUS judge not have sexual assault accusations against them that very well could be true?? Especially when the resistance to actually figuring out if they are true is so strong?
My God, the standards that some people apply to people for such positions are at an all time low.
And it shocks me that people would allow Kavanagh "losing his dream job" to be a legitimate concern. This position Trump is trying to put him in is so far beyond that. At the end of the day, a SCOTUS judge nominee needs to be beyond reproach, and we all know that Kavanaugh is not, even if this allegation is false... which I doubt. People seem to overestimating the chances of a woman putting herself in the position this woman is currently in. Please, someone give me any motive on her part that justifies it.
because in the current climate, many people think that every accusation is credible, no matter what. the overwhelming majority are credible, but that's not 100%, especially where politics are concerned.
the resistance is so strong because of the timing of the vote. there's a lot on the line for both parties. potentially decades worth of law making that could tip to one side or the other, and if it makes all the difference in the world if the vote happens before or after the mid-terms. so you can see why people are skeptical about the motivations on BOTH sides.
as far as we know right now, no, there is no motive on her part to go through what she's going through. but what if we found one out later, like piles of cash in an offshore account, but it was too late and this man's life is ruined?
now, after what we are hearing from other women and Avenatti, it's unlikely that this is untrue. But I'd like to know what, in your opinion, makes one sexual assault allegation credible and one not credible? is it motive for coming forward alone?
explain to me, if you will, how exactly his life would be ruined by not getting THIS lifetime appointment when he already has one? If its reputation , thats something that can be repaired wth contrition or if tge accusations are false, once the truth is revealed.
what he potentially goes through will fall far far far short of what these women will be forced to endure for speaking up.
I don't know, I just tend to think that sexual crimes reported on at the national/international level would suck pretty bad. And how is the truth revealed in a case of wrongful accusations of this nature? it's like proving there is no god. unless the accuser admits to lying, there is no "truth will come out".
I hate having to say this so often, but it seems to be necessary: I'm not defending this guy. I'm guessing he did what she is accusing him of.
But it just seems to me that no one gives a fuck if she's lying. it's "oh well, he's still a judge, men have been assholes for centuries, so if this one is collateral damage, so be it". I just think that's a dangerous road to go down.
I, for one, DON'T really give a fuck. On a personal level, yeah, I do. But on a broader, philosophical and societal level...nope don't give a fuck. This guy is the epitome of white privilege and advantage. As I mentioned earlier in the thread, none of these accusations are "ruining lives". They are ending the careers of men who have made enough money to live comfortably for generations. I find it hard to care if their reputation takes a hit when they belong to elite societies that will never truly abandon them.
You talk about a dangerous road to go down... What about the dangerous road we've been down for the last few thousand years? The dangerous road where women are raped and then are damn lucky just to avoid punishment and blame for their own victimisation, let alone see justice. We have been on this dangerous road for eons and if we take a different road that's dangerous for the previous benefactors...well...I just don't have many fucks to give.
the goal here shouldn't be to swing all the way the other way. the goal should be to end up in the middle.
I thought justice was supposed to be blind, not "blind unless he's white and rich".
This statement really illustrates the insane level of bias that western society builds into men. First of all, you and the other nervous males are really mixing and matching the meaning of the word justice. There is a stark difference between legal justice and "what people think ought to be right" and you have been blurring that line. On that note... "swing all the way the other way"??? Are you fucking joking? There are tens of thousands of untested rape kits sitting around in America. THAT is one side. According to you the other side "all the way the other way" is a handful of millionaire celebrities who had to quit their jobs and a nominee to the highest appointed moral authority in the free world having to just remain in his already eminent position.
Don't you see how insulting that is? This entire conversation is a slap in the face.
jesus christ. reasoned debate has left the building.
"every society honours its live conformists and its dead troublemakers"
How is it too much to ask that a SCOTUS judge not have sexual assault accusations against them that very well could be true?? Especially when the resistance to actually figuring out if they are true is so strong?
My God, the standards that some people apply to people for such positions are at an all time low.
And it shocks me that people would allow Kavanagh "losing his dream job" to be a legitimate concern. This position Trump is trying to put him in is so far beyond that. At the end of the day, a SCOTUS judge nominee needs to be beyond reproach, and we all know that Kavanaugh is not, even if this allegation is false... which I doubt. People seem to overestimating the chances of a woman putting herself in the position this woman is currently in. Please, someone give me any motive on her part that justifies it.
because in the current climate, many people think that every accusation is credible, no matter what. the overwhelming majority are credible, but that's not 100%, especially where politics are concerned.
the resistance is so strong because of the timing of the vote. there's a lot on the line for both parties. potentially decades worth of law making that could tip to one side or the other, and if it makes all the difference in the world if the vote happens before or after the mid-terms. so you can see why people are skeptical about the motivations on BOTH sides.
as far as we know right now, no, there is no motive on her part to go through what she's going through. but what if we found one out later, like piles of cash in an offshore account, but it was too late and this man's life is ruined?
now, after what we are hearing from other women and Avenatti, it's unlikely that this is untrue. But I'd like to know what, in your opinion, makes one sexual assault allegation credible and one not credible? is it motive for coming forward alone?
explain to me, if you will, how exactly his life would be ruined by not getting THIS lifetime appointment when he already has one? If its reputation , thats something that can be repaired wth contrition or if tge accusations are false, once the truth is revealed.
what he potentially goes through will fall far far far short of what these women will be forced to endure for speaking up.
I don't know, I just tend to think that sexual crimes reported on at the national/international level would suck pretty bad. And how is the truth revealed in a case of wrongful accusations of this nature? it's like proving there is no god. unless the accuser admits to lying, there is no "truth will come out".
I hate having to say this so often, but it seems to be necessary: I'm not defending this guy. I'm guessing he did what she is accusing him of.
But it just seems to me that no one gives a fuck if she's lying. it's "oh well, he's still a judge, men have been assholes for centuries, so if this one is collateral damage, so be it". I just think that's a dangerous road to go down.
Exactly how I feel. If proven to be untrue, it will be talked about for 15 minutes then forgotten. And he will always be known as the judge who didn't get nominated for this. If true I don't feel bad for him at all, but if not, this would be horrible to go through. Yes, abused women had to endure much worse, but that doesn't have anything to do with railroading someone. I don't get the attitude of "o well, he's already a judge so whats the harm." I agree it is a dangerous road.
I have no clue why you think proven false accusations would be talked about for 15 minutes and then forgotten.
But in any case, yup, someone getting hurt by false allegations is horrible. I ABSOLUTELY care about such instances... But I'm not sure what in the world people want here. At this moment there is no reason at all to assume they are false accusations, but the possibility of them being false is the MAIN topic of conversation. If these are not false accusations, which is much more likely than the reverse, that's way, way, WAY more disgusting than Kavanaugh not getting this SCOTUS seat.
So what exactly are you looking for here?? Is there some third option that I'm not aware of, in a dimension where life is always fair?
I do see a third option. Camp A: It seems many have the side of he's been accused, that is enough to disqualify him. Camp B: Another camp is this was long, he was young, its been almost 40 years, let him be a judge.
I actually think Camp B is uncommon. Although that has been cited constantly by those who want him disqualifies, very few are actually saying that. Far more are what I consider Camp C: delay a vote until a hearing takes places and testimony if weighed and the facts are researched. Then decide if he is qualified. I don't think you need the same level of evidence that a criminal case needs to disqualify him, far less. But many seem to want to skip that phase and go straight to disqualifying.
And yes, I do think if they are proven untrue it will make far less news than what it already has. Not even close.
this is what we are saying. not sure how that wasn't clear from the beginning.
"every society honours its live conformists and its dead troublemakers"
How is it too much to ask that a SCOTUS judge not have sexual assault accusations against them that very well could be true?? Especially when the resistance to actually figuring out if they are true is so strong?
My God, the standards that some people apply to people for such positions are at an all time low.
And it shocks me that people would allow Kavanagh "losing his dream job" to be a legitimate concern. This position Trump is trying to put him in is so far beyond that. At the end of the day, a SCOTUS judge nominee needs to be beyond reproach, and we all know that Kavanaugh is not, even if this allegation is false... which I doubt. People seem to overestimating the chances of a woman putting herself in the position this woman is currently in. Please, someone give me any motive on her part that justifies it.
because in the current climate, many people think that every accusation is credible, no matter what. the overwhelming majority are credible, but that's not 100%, especially where politics are concerned.
the resistance is so strong because of the timing of the vote. there's a lot on the line for both parties. potentially decades worth of law making that could tip to one side or the other, and if it makes all the difference in the world if the vote happens before or after the mid-terms. so you can see why people are skeptical about the motivations on BOTH sides.
as far as we know right now, no, there is no motive on her part to go through what she's going through. but what if we found one out later, like piles of cash in an offshore account, but it was too late and this man's life is ruined?
now, after what we are hearing from other women and Avenatti, it's unlikely that this is untrue. But I'd like to know what, in your opinion, makes one sexual assault allegation credible and one not credible? is it motive for coming forward alone?
explain to me, if you will, how exactly his life would be ruined by not getting THIS lifetime appointment when he already has one? If its reputation , thats something that can be repaired wth contrition or if tge accusations are false, once the truth is revealed.
what he potentially goes through will fall far far far short of what these women will be forced to endure for speaking up.
I don't know, I just tend to think that sexual crimes reported on at the national/international level would suck pretty bad. And how is the truth revealed in a case of wrongful accusations of this nature? it's like proving there is no god. unless the accuser admits to lying, there is no "truth will come out".
I hate having to say this so often, but it seems to be necessary: I'm not defending this guy. I'm guessing he did what she is accusing him of.
But it just seems to me that no one gives a fuck if she's lying. it's "oh well, he's still a judge, men have been assholes for centuries, so if this one is collateral damage, so be it". I just think that's a dangerous road to go down.
Exactly how I feel. If proven to be untrue, it will be talked about for 15 minutes then forgotten. And he will always be known as the judge who didn't get nominated for this. If true I don't feel bad for him at all, but if not, this would be horrible to go through. Yes, abused women had to endure much worse, but that doesn't have anything to do with railroading someone. I don't get the attitude of "o well, he's already a judge so whats the harm." I agree it is a dangerous road.
I have no clue why you think proven false accusations would be talked about for 15 minutes and then forgotten.
But in any case, yup, someone getting hurt by false allegations is horrible. I ABSOLUTELY care about such instances... But I'm not sure what in the world people want here. At this moment there is no reason at all to assume they are false accusations, but the possibility of them being false is the MAIN topic of conversation. If these are not false accusations, which is much more likely than the reverse, that's way, way, WAY more disgusting than Kavanaugh not getting this SCOTUS seat.
So what exactly are you looking for here?? Is there some third option that I'm not aware of, in a dimension where life is always fair?
I do see a third option. Camp A: It seems many have the side of he's been accused, that is enough to disqualify him. Camp B: Another camp is this was long, he was young, its been almost 40 years, let him be a judge.
I actually think Camp B is uncommon. Although that has been cited constantly by those who want him disqualifies, very few are actually saying that. Far more are what I consider Camp C: delay a vote until a hearing takes places and testimony if weighed and the facts are researched. Then decide if he is qualified. I don't think you need the same level of evidence that a criminal case needs to disqualify him, far less. But many seem to want to skip that phase and go straight to disqualifying.
And yes, I do think if they are proven untrue it will make far less news than what it already has. Not even close.
this is what we are saying. not sure how that wasn't clear from the beginning.
not all of us have our pitchforks at the ready based solely on political affiliation.
There are probably at least 10 conservative judges without the history or baggage of Kavanaugh and could have been nominated but were not. Are you not the company you keep? The Team Trump Treason Administration is a train wreck and some on here want to believe Kavanaugh is somehow “different” than the main players in this train wreck? Laughable.
are you claiming that the Trump admin had knowledge prior to nomination of his college behaviour?
"every society honours its live conformists and its dead troublemakers"
How is it too much to ask that a SCOTUS judge not have sexual assault accusations against them that very well could be true?? Especially when the resistance to actually figuring out if they are true is so strong?
My God, the standards that some people apply to people for such positions are at an all time low.
And it shocks me that people would allow Kavanagh "losing his dream job" to be a legitimate concern. This position Trump is trying to put him in is so far beyond that. At the end of the day, a SCOTUS judge nominee needs to be beyond reproach, and we all know that Kavanaugh is not, even if this allegation is false... which I doubt. People seem to overestimating the chances of a woman putting herself in the position this woman is currently in. Please, someone give me any motive on her part that justifies it.
because in the current climate, many people think that every accusation is credible, no matter what. the overwhelming majority are credible, but that's not 100%, especially where politics are concerned.
the resistance is so strong because of the timing of the vote. there's a lot on the line for both parties. potentially decades worth of law making that could tip to one side or the other, and if it makes all the difference in the world if the vote happens before or after the mid-terms. so you can see why people are skeptical about the motivations on BOTH sides.
as far as we know right now, no, there is no motive on her part to go through what she's going through. but what if we found one out later, like piles of cash in an offshore account, but it was too late and this man's life is ruined?
now, after what we are hearing from other women and Avenatti, it's unlikely that this is untrue. But I'd like to know what, in your opinion, makes one sexual assault allegation credible and one not credible? is it motive for coming forward alone?
explain to me, if you will, how exactly his life would be ruined by not getting THIS lifetime appointment when he already has one? If its reputation , thats something that can be repaired wth contrition or if tge accusations are false, once the truth is revealed.
what he potentially goes through will fall far far far short of what these women will be forced to endure for speaking up.
I don't know, I just tend to think that sexual crimes reported on at the national/international level would suck pretty bad. And how is the truth revealed in a case of wrongful accusations of this nature? it's like proving there is no god. unless the accuser admits to lying, there is no "truth will come out".
I hate having to say this so often, but it seems to be necessary: I'm not defending this guy. I'm guessing he did what she is accusing him of.
But it just seems to me that no one gives a fuck if she's lying. it's "oh well, he's still a judge, men have been assholes for centuries, so if this one is collateral damage, so be it". I just think that's a dangerous road to go down.
I, for one, DON'T really give a fuck. On a personal level, yeah, I do. But on a broader, philosophical and societal level...nope don't give a fuck. This guy is the epitome of white privilege and advantage. As I mentioned earlier in the thread, none of these accusations are "ruining lives". They are ending the careers of men who have made enough money to live comfortably for generations. I find it hard to care if their reputation takes a hit when they belong to elite societies that will never truly abandon them.
You talk about a dangerous road to go down... What about the dangerous road we've been down for the last few thousand years? The dangerous road where women are raped and then are damn lucky just to avoid punishment and blame for their own victimisation, let alone see justice. We have been on this dangerous road for eons and if we take a different road that's dangerous for the previous benefactors...well...I just don't have many fucks to give.
the goal here shouldn't be to swing all the way the other way. the goal should be to end up in the middle.
I thought justice was supposed to be blind, not "blind unless he's white and rich".
This statement really illustrates the insane level of bias that western society builds into men. First of all, you and the other nervous males are really mixing and matching the meaning of the word justice. There is a stark difference between legal justice and "what people think ought to be right" and you have been blurring that line. On that note... "swing all the way the other way"??? Are you fucking joking? There are tens of thousands of untested rape kits sitting around in America. THAT is one side. According to you the other side "all the way the other way" is a handful of millionaire celebrities who had to quit their jobs and a nominee to the highest appointed moral authority in the free world having to just remain in his already eminent position.
Don't you see how insulting that is? This entire conversation is a slap in the face.
jesus christ. reasoned debate has left the building.
What a cop out lol If you can't hang, don't climb.
Comments
If I don't laugh, I'll be grinding my teeth.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
im already starting the #meneither movement. For any guy that has never come even close to anything like it seems some of these creeps have been doing.
i personally lean to this being true. But my opinion doesn’t matter.
First of all, you and the other nervous males are really mixing and matching the meaning of the word justice. There is a stark difference between legal justice and "what people think ought to be right" and you have been blurring that line. On that note...
"swing all the way the other way"???
Are you fucking joking?
There are tens of thousands of untested rape kits sitting around in America. THAT is one side.
According to you the other side "all the way the other way" is a handful of millionaire celebrities who had to quit their jobs and a nominee to the highest appointed moral authority in the free world having to just remain in his already eminent position.
Don't you see how insulting that is? This entire conversation is a slap in the face.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Jokes don't come from a vacuum.
Camp A: It seems many have the side of he's been accused, that is enough to disqualify him.
Camp B: Another camp is this was long, he was young, its been almost 40 years, let him be a judge.
I actually think Camp B is uncommon. Although that has been cited constantly by those who want him disqualifies, very few are actually saying that. Far more are what I consider Camp C: delay a vote until a hearing takes places and testimony if weighed and the facts are researched. Then decide if he is qualified. I don't think you need the same level of evidence that a criminal case needs to disqualify him, far less. But many seem to want to skip that phase and go straight to disqualifying.
And yes, I do think if they are proven untrue it will make far less news than what it already has. Not even close.
What I was trying to convey is that men everywhere are quaking in their boots at the prospect of losing their privilege. For the first time EVER women are just barely occasionally being believed over men, and that is being conflated (by pathetic fear) into this doom and gloom of a dangerous road where men's lives will just be "ruined" by accusations made willy nilly by capricious women.
If you can't hang, don't climb.