Thank you for documenting all of these, Janice. MeToo and BelieveAllWomen destroyed innocent until proven guilty. Almost none of the false accusers and defamatory “journalists” have been punished for ruining lives and livelihoods, which allows them to keep up the hysterias and does a disservice to real victims.
The 2006 Duke Lacrosse scandal is ground zero of this toxicity. I will be publishing a deep dive on Sunday naming and shaming the district attorney, propagandists, and academics responsible for that fiasco.
Good afternoon from New York and thank you Janice for keeping it fresh.
I am an investigative reporter specializing in fraud. Early in the #me2 movement, I wrote a series of articles culminating with a kind of review, "Take a Step Back." There was immediate retaliation from local women claiming to be feminists, who sought to get me fired from all of my freelance jobs. Here is the allegedly offending article:
My "accusers" called me out on my heinous misconduct: alleged consensual sex 22 years earlier, asking to pet a dog, making women uncomfortable with my writing, and allegedly stating that I was polyamorous at a cocktail party. Here is a summary of what happened.
My total revenue loss was about $50,000 a year in freelance revenue — but I kept my business, which is a kind of astrology news service ( and a journalism nonprofit). If you read my stuff here and would like to support my continuing work, you're most invited to subscribe to my substack. Janice Fiamengo advocated for me at the time, and is also my friend and subscriber (we are both perpetual English majors).
If you would like to see how one of these things shakes out when properly investigated, here ya go. By far the best document is a confession by one of the "organizers that this was a sham, scam and shonda:
1. There was never really a "MeToo" movement - a movement where victims came forward publicly to expose how widespread the problem is. It was always mostly a "J'Accuse!" movement - a movement where anonymous women could make unsubstantiated allegations out of court to get revenge.
2. There was never a time in history when women's accusations were not automatically believed. The woman who got Emmett Till lynched for reckless eye-balling admitted on her death bed that she had lied. Ancient literature is rife with stories of men being destroyed on the basis of a woman's accusation (whether justifiably or not, the point is that the woman was believed).
It was always just a warlock-hunt by radical feminists and their useful idiots.
Very well said Janice. You excel in your ability to speak the unspoken truth that is beyond the awareness of most. This is a perfect example:
"MeToo was helpful only in one narrow sense, that it offered a transparent window onto feminism’s aims and beliefs. In a sane society, it would have signaled the end of any claim feminism could make to stand for equality and human dignity."
Janice, I think that the appalling, total lack of empathy for male suffering displayed by these feminists comes from more than just the generally lesser social empathy for men compared to women. It's also built on the conviction that the guilty have lost their right to empathy and pretty much deserve whatever is done to them. If this is so, then it adds extra difficulty to feminists ever considering the question of false accusations, since such a realization would convict the accusers. The whole system is a racket based on a total and absolute attribution of guilt and innocence, an inviolable moral polarization by identity. As long as they can hang on to that absolute moral polarity, then no behavior is beyond their reach, no matter how despicable.
I think it’s important to note that #MeToo (my fingers wanted me to write “#MePoo) is an extension of feminist legal theory.
That theory is that the principles of innocence until proven guilt, confrontation of the accused by the accuser, due process of law, and right of the accused to mount a defense are severally, and collectively misogynist. Women can only possess rights, in effect, when men have none.
This is a root principle of feminism in its struggle with the imaginary patriarchy. Women cannot be free unless men have no rights nor ability to resist female accusation. This is, of course, not what feminists claim to demand. It is, however, what they demand, and seek to impose.
Feminism is, in its deepest essence, a dishonorable movement founded on lies. Those lies are deliberately intended to harm, and subjugate men.
A lower profile but as pernicious version of this public list occurs everyday in the workplace. A woman can say that she’s simply “uncomfortable” with a male coworker without stating the specific action causing the discomfort. This will trigger an investigation by HR in which HR will interview every female coworker to determine if they too are “uncomfortable”. They may interview any male coworkers to determine if they can provide any stories about or any observed conduct by the man that would justify the woman’s complaint. God help the man if a detractor uses this an opportunity to throw him under the bus. HR will then go back to the man and state that they have received multiple complaints. If the man asked who said it, HR will hide behind “confidentiality”, justified by the twisted logic that if the accuser is identified that will inhibit other woman from filing complaints. The damage to the reputation is done, without any other action on the part of the employer.
Feminism has always been about "more for us." More power, more money, more rights, more privileges." MeToo is more of the same. And let's be clear: it's gratuitous. The idea that it seeks to improve men's behavior is exposed as a lie because it makes no effort to distinguish true claims from false ones.
• People respond to incentives and disincentives. As long as the potential rewards (both tangible and intangible) for making false accusations continue to dwarf the (practically nonexistent) negative consequences for making them, you can expect more of the same.
• It never ceases to amaze me how people just casually look past the movie “Mean Girls” as some fantastical film that depicts an imaginary world. The movie is practically a documentary as it pertains to female behavior. Social shaming, reputation demolition, spreading gossip, etc. These aren’t just the behaviors of teenage girls in a confined, high school social environment. This is the modus operandi of women in general.
• The paradox/conflicting nature of women’s sexuality in these matters is rather infuriating. Used “offensively,” women’s sexuality is a cudgel that can be used to metaphorically beat men into submission and/or compel desired outcomes. It holds immense power and influence, and can be shamelessly wielded by women who elect to use it as such. Conversely, if employed “defensively,” women’s sexuality is practically tissue paper, able to be penetrated (no pun intended) by the slightest “infraction” (real or perceived) by men. Women’s sexuality bestows upon them either preposterous power or feeble frailty. How they get to use it is completely up to them, subject to change at any time for any reason, and entirely situationally-dependent.
• Women, as a class of people, would likely be willing to happily step over a veritable mountain of corpses of falsely-accused men if it meant that they could subject a single wolf-whistling, cat-calling, ass-pinching man to public embarrassment and excoriation. If #MeToo proved anything, it was that the perceived victimization of women is only exceeded by the very real vindictiveness of women.
I'm currently reading a book about psychopaths. It suggests that they can be identified by adherence to a list of characteristics which includes items such as "lack of remorse", "callousness", "irresponsibility", and "refusal to take accountability". It's quite interesting!
Just thought I'd share that. Happy new year, everyone.
“MeToo” Was neither “Fad”, nor “Revolution”; it was a Psy-Op, or, Psychological Operation, if you’ve been living under a log for the last 40 years. This is documented. Reference: BOB BLAND. Bland is an Evangelist woman who changed her name to that curious appellation.
An INDUSTRIAL MILITARY CONTRACTOR, she Hijacked the term “MeToo” from a Civil Rights group. She was awarded a lucrative contract for her effort. All SUPPRESSED Public Information,
Thanks for this excellent piece, Janet, not that I needed any convincing, but I hope it will get further afield and keep the wave of truth backlash against this crime against humanity.
Why would any sane man not be attracted to the MGTOW movement. Even if you never met, dated or were in the same room as these Harpy’s you are vulnerable to their Bullshit!
Disappointed in Hoff-Summers and Borysenko as well…oh well nothing is perfect!
Donegan is at Stanford? What a surprise. Between her, Elizabeth Holmes, Bankman-Fried and his parents/professors, and the Stanford Internet Observatory I think we can safely dismiss anything out of that university as Woke illiberal nonsense without a second look. After the Substackian journalists and their allies in the conservative press and the donors are done with Harvard a take-down of Stanford should be the next target.
Thank you for documenting all of these, Janice. MeToo and BelieveAllWomen destroyed innocent until proven guilty. Almost none of the false accusers and defamatory “journalists” have been punished for ruining lives and livelihoods, which allows them to keep up the hysterias and does a disservice to real victims.
The 2006 Duke Lacrosse scandal is ground zero of this toxicity. I will be publishing a deep dive on Sunday naming and shaming the district attorney, propagandists, and academics responsible for that fiasco.
Good afternoon from New York and thank you Janice for keeping it fresh.
I am an investigative reporter specializing in fraud. Early in the #me2 movement, I wrote a series of articles culminating with a kind of review, "Take a Step Back." There was immediate retaliation from local women claiming to be feminists, who sought to get me fired from all of my freelance jobs. Here is the allegedly offending article:
https://planetwaves.net/take-a-step-back/
My "accusers" called me out on my heinous misconduct: alleged consensual sex 22 years earlier, asking to pet a dog, making women uncomfortable with my writing, and allegedly stating that I was polyamorous at a cocktail party. Here is a summary of what happened.
https://planetwaves.net/me-too-review-the-johnny-depp-verdict/
My total revenue loss was about $50,000 a year in freelance revenue — but I kept my business, which is a kind of astrology news service ( and a journalism nonprofit). If you read my stuff here and would like to support my continuing work, you're most invited to subscribe to my substack. Janice Fiamengo advocated for me at the time, and is also my friend and subscriber (we are both perpetual English majors).
SUBSTACK FOR ASTROLOGY NEWS SERVICE
https://planetwaves.substack.com/
SUBSTACK FOR MY RADIO PROGRAM AND JOURNALISM NONPROFIT
https://planetwavesfm.substack.com/
If you would like to see how one of these things shakes out when properly investigated, here ya go. By far the best document is a confession by one of the "organizers that this was a sham, scam and shonda:
https://planetwaves.net/pdf/191218-wojehowski-final.pdf
JANICE THANK YOU FOR ALL YOU'VE HELPED ME WITH OVER THE YEARS, including tomorrow's forthcoming interview with you and Tom Gold, MEN ARE GOOD.
Yes most of us do our best
with love
Eric Francis Coppolino
1. There was never really a "MeToo" movement - a movement where victims came forward publicly to expose how widespread the problem is. It was always mostly a "J'Accuse!" movement - a movement where anonymous women could make unsubstantiated allegations out of court to get revenge.
2. There was never a time in history when women's accusations were not automatically believed. The woman who got Emmett Till lynched for reckless eye-balling admitted on her death bed that she had lied. Ancient literature is rife with stories of men being destroyed on the basis of a woman's accusation (whether justifiably or not, the point is that the woman was believed).
It was always just a warlock-hunt by radical feminists and their useful idiots.
Very well said Janice. You excel in your ability to speak the unspoken truth that is beyond the awareness of most. This is a perfect example:
"MeToo was helpful only in one narrow sense, that it offered a transparent window onto feminism’s aims and beliefs. In a sane society, it would have signaled the end of any claim feminism could make to stand for equality and human dignity."
So true and wonderfully said!
Janice, I think that the appalling, total lack of empathy for male suffering displayed by these feminists comes from more than just the generally lesser social empathy for men compared to women. It's also built on the conviction that the guilty have lost their right to empathy and pretty much deserve whatever is done to them. If this is so, then it adds extra difficulty to feminists ever considering the question of false accusations, since such a realization would convict the accusers. The whole system is a racket based on a total and absolute attribution of guilt and innocence, an inviolable moral polarization by identity. As long as they can hang on to that absolute moral polarity, then no behavior is beyond their reach, no matter how despicable.
I think it’s important to note that #MeToo (my fingers wanted me to write “#MePoo) is an extension of feminist legal theory.
That theory is that the principles of innocence until proven guilt, confrontation of the accused by the accuser, due process of law, and right of the accused to mount a defense are severally, and collectively misogynist. Women can only possess rights, in effect, when men have none.
This is a root principle of feminism in its struggle with the imaginary patriarchy. Women cannot be free unless men have no rights nor ability to resist female accusation. This is, of course, not what feminists claim to demand. It is, however, what they demand, and seek to impose.
Feminism is, in its deepest essence, a dishonorable movement founded on lies. Those lies are deliberately intended to harm, and subjugate men.
A lower profile but as pernicious version of this public list occurs everyday in the workplace. A woman can say that she’s simply “uncomfortable” with a male coworker without stating the specific action causing the discomfort. This will trigger an investigation by HR in which HR will interview every female coworker to determine if they too are “uncomfortable”. They may interview any male coworkers to determine if they can provide any stories about or any observed conduct by the man that would justify the woman’s complaint. God help the man if a detractor uses this an opportunity to throw him under the bus. HR will then go back to the man and state that they have received multiple complaints. If the man asked who said it, HR will hide behind “confidentiality”, justified by the twisted logic that if the accuser is identified that will inhibit other woman from filing complaints. The damage to the reputation is done, without any other action on the part of the employer.
Feminism has always been about "more for us." More power, more money, more rights, more privileges." MeToo is more of the same. And let's be clear: it's gratuitous. The idea that it seeks to improve men's behavior is exposed as a lie because it makes no effort to distinguish true claims from false ones.
My takeaways from this:
• People respond to incentives and disincentives. As long as the potential rewards (both tangible and intangible) for making false accusations continue to dwarf the (practically nonexistent) negative consequences for making them, you can expect more of the same.
• It never ceases to amaze me how people just casually look past the movie “Mean Girls” as some fantastical film that depicts an imaginary world. The movie is practically a documentary as it pertains to female behavior. Social shaming, reputation demolition, spreading gossip, etc. These aren’t just the behaviors of teenage girls in a confined, high school social environment. This is the modus operandi of women in general.
• The paradox/conflicting nature of women’s sexuality in these matters is rather infuriating. Used “offensively,” women’s sexuality is a cudgel that can be used to metaphorically beat men into submission and/or compel desired outcomes. It holds immense power and influence, and can be shamelessly wielded by women who elect to use it as such. Conversely, if employed “defensively,” women’s sexuality is practically tissue paper, able to be penetrated (no pun intended) by the slightest “infraction” (real or perceived) by men. Women’s sexuality bestows upon them either preposterous power or feeble frailty. How they get to use it is completely up to them, subject to change at any time for any reason, and entirely situationally-dependent.
• Women, as a class of people, would likely be willing to happily step over a veritable mountain of corpses of falsely-accused men if it meant that they could subject a single wolf-whistling, cat-calling, ass-pinching man to public embarrassment and excoriation. If #MeToo proved anything, it was that the perceived victimization of women is only exceeded by the very real vindictiveness of women.
I'm currently reading a book about psychopaths. It suggests that they can be identified by adherence to a list of characteristics which includes items such as "lack of remorse", "callousness", "irresponsibility", and "refusal to take accountability". It's quite interesting!
Just thought I'd share that. Happy new year, everyone.
“MeToo” Was neither “Fad”, nor “Revolution”; it was a Psy-Op, or, Psychological Operation, if you’ve been living under a log for the last 40 years. This is documented. Reference: BOB BLAND. Bland is an Evangelist woman who changed her name to that curious appellation.
An INDUSTRIAL MILITARY CONTRACTOR, she Hijacked the term “MeToo” from a Civil Rights group. She was awarded a lucrative contract for her effort. All SUPPRESSED Public Information,
People and feminists!.
This is an extreme example of how the tactic of "Relational Aggression" is being used to destroy men.
"Demagogue" is "a gifted demagogue with particular skill in manipulating the press".
The article demonstrates just how critically unwell, emotionally and psychologically our society has become.
Thanks for this excellent piece, Janet, not that I needed any convincing, but I hope it will get further afield and keep the wave of truth backlash against this crime against humanity.
Why would any sane man not be attracted to the MGTOW movement. Even if you never met, dated or were in the same room as these Harpy’s you are vulnerable to their Bullshit!
Disappointed in Hoff-Summers and Borysenko as well…oh well nothing is perfect!
Women are the HR department of society for the not so new world order...
Donegan is at Stanford? What a surprise. Between her, Elizabeth Holmes, Bankman-Fried and his parents/professors, and the Stanford Internet Observatory I think we can safely dismiss anything out of that university as Woke illiberal nonsense without a second look. After the Substackian journalists and their allies in the conservative press and the donors are done with Harvard a take-down of Stanford should be the next target.