Let us be entirely clear. This about power. Period. Feminists have long demanded that a woman's say-so, regardless of how implausible or even impossible, should hold the power to destroy a man's reputation and livelihood, and take away his freedom. That is the whole point; sexual abuse is just the cover story.
Yes but remember the woman who researched what it was like to be a man. She committed suicide. Bullies can't even handle a taste of their own medicine. ie Safe Spaces. or Elon Musk is taking over Twitter. They become twitter-paited. Men R Good. 😊
If I recall correctly there have been a number of women who as an experiment dressed and behaved as a man and they found the experience not pleasant at all.
The undisguisedness (if that's a word) is truly astounding. They're not even embarrassed to say that there should be one law for accused men and an entirely different law for women who do bad things (women are always criminalized by others, usually men; men are just bad and dangerous, requiring punishment).
If I recall correctly Daphne Patai wrote about how in the future our leaders will not be judged on their abilities, but their past sexual/romantic behaviour and only people with exemplary records would be acceptable.
It's telling that feminist leaders would express outrage over the court's reasonable and correct finding of not guilty in the Virtanen case yet they expressed no such indignation over his subjugation to a culture that exploits and objectifies violence against men for the public's entertainment. On how many occasions have we heard feminist leaders proclaim that women accused of committing grievous crimes should not be held responsible because their inherent victimhood within patriarchal culture precludes any judgment of their misdeeds? Even if Virtanen were guilty, a reasonable and equitable application of this feminist logic should conclude that hockey players are entitled to the same exemptions given that their bodies are both appropriated and brutalized for cultural purposes. Yet that standard feminist logic seems to shift and evolve whenever a new logic is needed to preserve the focus on female victimhood and male aggression. Such hypocrisy!
Men (esp. white men) are never seen as victims by feminists. Feminists would find it hard to argue against your premise about the violent objectification of men's bodies in hockey; but if they were forced to agree, they would say that the best thing for Virtanen and all men in hockey would be for the NHL to be disbanded altogether. They hate seeing the joy that many men take in competition; and they especially hate the many women who find such men attractive.
Indeed! This is why feminism generated the notion of "toxic masculinity" so that men--especially white, hetero men-- could be viewed as victims of "their own toxicity"--which is to say that they should not be considered victims at all--whereas women should always be considered legitimate victims suffering under male tyranny. I'm sure many feminists would argue that the NHL and other such organizations should be disbanded, yet they trip over their own hypocrisy once again when they decry school or other programs that are harassing and discriminating against girls by not creating opportunities for them to engage in these same sporting activities that objectify men.
Yet the Toronto Police threaten to arrest boys and men who complain about female doctors and female teachers if the female doctors and teachers feel harassed. Pathetic.
Its no secret that most individuals most of the time are utterly against presumption of innocence aka innocent until proven guilty. They only praise/defend it when it suits them.
I support Janice's position completely. If it would not be too offensive, I would like to share two articles of mine addressing the same issue, with gratitude to Janice for staying vigilant about this issue:
The women's whisper network is a parasitic criminal secret society no different from the Mafia or Yakuza. It needs to be on the list of criminal organisations in Canada and actively targeted by law enforcement.
Our universities and government institutions are under the iron grip of an evil misandric cabal that bares ill will towards the general population. The cable has two goals. They seek to gratify the most debase of human vices which is to feel powerful. They indulge this vice by inflicting misery on others. Second they seek to increase the reach and depth of their ability to cause human suffering.
In a recent youtube you mentioned having stored the Fiamengo Files on odysee; after setting the language filter (from Dutch) to English, the simple search term "Fiamengo" seemed to return many if not all of them, though a bit slowly. More sophisticated search terms did not work.
The sex offender registry is actually in fact one of the worst active laws in the United States and in the other nations(Canada, United Kingdom & Australia e.g.) that adopted it. The s.o.r. and all the other laws/acts connected to it mustn't be amended in any way. They must be repealed(no new law takings its place) now!
Here in the UK parliament in particular has repeatedly attempted to "rig" rape and sexual assault trials by messing with the rules of evidence and preventing the cross examination of the complainant. Explicitly to "increase the number of convictions". Back in 2018 there was a huge scandal when Judges and "whistleblowers " revealed that the Crown Prosecution Service and Police were deliberately concealing evidence in a variety of ways,. The conclusion was that 25% of convictions were likely to be "unsafe". Low and behold in the subsequent years the convictions dropped by ... 25% . Rather than celebrate this triumph of justice that evidence was being shown to the court in the proper manner the result has been yet another parliamentary act trying to prevent examination of key sources of evidence and prevent cross examination of complainants on their evidence. So one can see that "justice" remains a minor consideration in the goal of increasing convictions. In effect this makes the actual trials political trials because the verdicts are based on political expediency, reaching targets set by politicians.
One of the most ridiculous claims of feminism us that rape and sexual assault has ever been somehow normal in western culture. Quite clearly many such scandals are recorded in English history resulting in prosecutions or going into exile or exclusion from "society" . It seems forgotten that one of the ways black men ended up lynched or hung was through accusations or rape(as in to kill a mockingbird) and this was very much based on "believe" . Feminism didn't create the cultural assumption males are always responsible and females are fragile Angel's, they have merely ridden in and turned it into a principle of jurisprudence, leg alone cultural norm.
Of course all of this means that the weight of cultural and institutional norms is in fact in favour of the complainant!!
Let us be entirely clear. This about power. Period. Feminists have long demanded that a woman's say-so, regardless of how implausible or even impossible, should hold the power to destroy a man's reputation and livelihood, and take away his freedom. That is the whole point; sexual abuse is just the cover story.
If only these cowards would get a tiny taste of their own medicine they would surely be more likely to see their misandry. Then again, maybe not. lol
They won't learn unless it happens to a close male relative - son, brother, etc. Until then they will remain clueless.
Or a true friend
Yes but remember the woman who researched what it was like to be a man. She committed suicide. Bullies can't even handle a taste of their own medicine. ie Safe Spaces. or Elon Musk is taking over Twitter. They become twitter-paited. Men R Good. 😊
If I recall correctly there have been a number of women who as an experiment dressed and behaved as a man and they found the experience not pleasant at all.
check out this extremely informative website right away: helpsaveoursons.com
Equal rights advocates often claim that "gender stereotyping" is damaging, yet they partake with glee in pillorying men.
The shear level of animosity towards men is astounding, but sadly it has been slowly increasing in intensity for a few decades.
The undisguisedness (if that's a word) is truly astounding. They're not even embarrassed to say that there should be one law for accused men and an entirely different law for women who do bad things (women are always criminalized by others, usually men; men are just bad and dangerous, requiring punishment).
If I recall correctly Daphne Patai wrote about how in the future our leaders will not be judged on their abilities, but their past sexual/romantic behaviour and only people with exemplary records would be acceptable.
It's telling that feminist leaders would express outrage over the court's reasonable and correct finding of not guilty in the Virtanen case yet they expressed no such indignation over his subjugation to a culture that exploits and objectifies violence against men for the public's entertainment. On how many occasions have we heard feminist leaders proclaim that women accused of committing grievous crimes should not be held responsible because their inherent victimhood within patriarchal culture precludes any judgment of their misdeeds? Even if Virtanen were guilty, a reasonable and equitable application of this feminist logic should conclude that hockey players are entitled to the same exemptions given that their bodies are both appropriated and brutalized for cultural purposes. Yet that standard feminist logic seems to shift and evolve whenever a new logic is needed to preserve the focus on female victimhood and male aggression. Such hypocrisy!
Men (esp. white men) are never seen as victims by feminists. Feminists would find it hard to argue against your premise about the violent objectification of men's bodies in hockey; but if they were forced to agree, they would say that the best thing for Virtanen and all men in hockey would be for the NHL to be disbanded altogether. They hate seeing the joy that many men take in competition; and they especially hate the many women who find such men attractive.
Indeed! This is why feminism generated the notion of "toxic masculinity" so that men--especially white, hetero men-- could be viewed as victims of "their own toxicity"--which is to say that they should not be considered victims at all--whereas women should always be considered legitimate victims suffering under male tyranny. I'm sure many feminists would argue that the NHL and other such organizations should be disbanded, yet they trip over their own hypocrisy once again when they decry school or other programs that are harassing and discriminating against girls by not creating opportunities for them to engage in these same sporting activities that objectify men.
Yet the Toronto Police threaten to arrest boys and men who complain about female doctors and female teachers if the female doctors and teachers feel harassed. Pathetic.
"... allegation mattered far more than the verdict." Basically, she's parroting the 'believe all women' mantra.
Its no secret that most individuals most of the time are utterly against presumption of innocence aka innocent until proven guilty. They only praise/defend it when it suits them.
I support Janice's position completely. If it would not be too offensive, I would like to share two articles of mine addressing the same issue, with gratitude to Janice for staying vigilant about this issue:
https://www.mindingthecampus.org/2018/10/25/should-we-believe-whatever-a-man-or-woman-says/
https://www.mindingthecampus.org/2019/09/23/should-false-rape-reports-be-punished/
check out this extremely informative website right away: helpsaveoursons.com
The women's whisper network is a parasitic criminal secret society no different from the Mafia or Yakuza. It needs to be on the list of criminal organisations in Canada and actively targeted by law enforcement.
Our universities and government institutions are under the iron grip of an evil misandric cabal that bares ill will towards the general population. The cable has two goals. They seek to gratify the most debase of human vices which is to feel powerful. They indulge this vice by inflicting misery on others. Second they seek to increase the reach and depth of their ability to cause human suffering.
The solution to this is pretty clear, if crude - accuse Mary Jane James of sexual assault.
I'm not going to do it, but no doubt someone will.
Janice, good to find you here.
In a recent youtube you mentioned having stored the Fiamengo Files on odysee; after setting the language filter (from Dutch) to English, the simple search term "Fiamengo" seemed to return many if not all of them, though a bit slowly. More sophisticated search terms did not work.
Hi Dutch! I believe you can find all the videos stored here, in reverse chronological order: https://odysee.com/@StudioBruleArchive:e
Indeed. Thanks
The sex offender registry is actually in fact one of the worst active laws in the United States and in the other nations(Canada, United Kingdom & Australia e.g.) that adopted it. The s.o.r. and all the other laws/acts connected to it mustn't be amended in any way. They must be repealed(no new law takings its place) now!
Here in the UK parliament in particular has repeatedly attempted to "rig" rape and sexual assault trials by messing with the rules of evidence and preventing the cross examination of the complainant. Explicitly to "increase the number of convictions". Back in 2018 there was a huge scandal when Judges and "whistleblowers " revealed that the Crown Prosecution Service and Police were deliberately concealing evidence in a variety of ways,. The conclusion was that 25% of convictions were likely to be "unsafe". Low and behold in the subsequent years the convictions dropped by ... 25% . Rather than celebrate this triumph of justice that evidence was being shown to the court in the proper manner the result has been yet another parliamentary act trying to prevent examination of key sources of evidence and prevent cross examination of complainants on their evidence. So one can see that "justice" remains a minor consideration in the goal of increasing convictions. In effect this makes the actual trials political trials because the verdicts are based on political expediency, reaching targets set by politicians.
One of the most ridiculous claims of feminism us that rape and sexual assault has ever been somehow normal in western culture. Quite clearly many such scandals are recorded in English history resulting in prosecutions or going into exile or exclusion from "society" . It seems forgotten that one of the ways black men ended up lynched or hung was through accusations or rape(as in to kill a mockingbird) and this was very much based on "believe" . Feminism didn't create the cultural assumption males are always responsible and females are fragile Angel's, they have merely ridden in and turned it into a principle of jurisprudence, leg alone cultural norm.
Of course all of this means that the weight of cultural and institutional norms is in fact in favour of the complainant!!