Salem MeToo Trials

A Place to respectfully discuss those topics that you should never discuss.
post

Re: Salem MeToo Trials

Postby Mountaineer Buc » Tue Oct 09, 2018 1:52 pm

Ken Carson wrote:
Mountaineer Buc wrote:The thing that bothers you is that they did not come to the immediate determination you did despite not having the benefit of your hindsight.

The school could not have saved this kid from what he went through, but IT DID save him from going through any more of it, because the girls ended up confessing to the school administrators when questioned by them in an effort to prepare for the legal battle they are now in.

The girls are the ***holes, Ken. They manipulated everyone involved.

This started in July 2017. Kid was bullied all year at school until he was shackled in April of 2018 after another girl made an allegation. He reported the bullying to the school. You think the school protected him?

You're not listening to me. You know NOW that the whole thing was bullshit. They didn't. What they had was corroborated accusations which prompted them to take action to protect their students from what appeared to be a sexual predator. They were manipulated by those girls into taking that action.
Image
User avatar
Mountaineer Buc
 
Posts: 14774
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 1:15 pm
Location: Crestucky
Has thanked: 160 times
Been thanked: 673 times

Re: Salem MeToo Trials

Postby DreadNaught » Wed Oct 10, 2018 8:03 am

beardmcdoug wrote:
Mountaineer Buc wrote:Because as much as some would love for it to be true, this has nothing to do with the Me too movement, nothing to do with Kavanaugh, and nothing to do with modern political culture.

It has everything to do with 3 bitchy girls who decided they could do whatever they want to whomever they want. And this could just as easily happened 25 years ago and probably did.

I reject the premise, I reject the effort to tie it to a larger social problem, and I reject sprinkles as a topping I should have to pay for on my sundae.


I'm not so sure about this though. This past weekend while I was down in FL visiting my grandparents, my mom and dad and I went for a walk along the riverwalk - I've said it before, but both of my parents are liberal MSNBC-watching boomers. My mom is absolutely devastated about the whole Kavanaugh thing. We talked for a good 45 minutes about the whole thing, where at certain points my mom was getting a little hysterical (rightfully so) recounting moments in her life where she encountered behavior from men that ranged from overt sexual assault to casual, uncomfortable situations of sexual nature.

After all of it, she's boiling down to the line, "what happened when all the boys were raped by the priests?! Did anyone ask to see photographic evidence!? NO - we just believed them. Can't we - FOR ONCE - just believe the women!?"

She's overshooting the mark here, IMO, and is ignoring all the times that we have - for instance, which I brought up, the Weinstein stuff.


Point is. My mom is just like A LOT of other women out there, who casually toss aside the premise of "due process". She is well read. She hangs with an intellectual class of women. They go to DC marches together. There are literally millions of women out there just like my mom. She does not represent what I would call the "liberal fringe extreme". But there is a sizable portion of people/women out there just like her who hold these kinds of views. And she, like a lot of other people/women, has no clue how radical that opinion actually is. And they're firm about it.


Thankfully she has a son that can let her know how radical of a view "Believe ALL _______" actually is. Put any group (Blacks, Whites, Muslims, Jews, etc) in that blank and it's equally radical and antithetical to the core principle of the presumption of innocence that ties western culture together. As Ken mentioned this isn't some 'believe all or none' dichotomy. Each situation is unique and alleged victims should be listened to so we can determine corroboration, details, facts, or evidence.

Alot of people seem to have wanted BK to be a sacrificial lamb to the #MeToo movement. His actual innocence (and even the presumption of it) was secondary to the prevailing importance that ALL women should be believed. That is an easy narrative to latch onto when that person being sacrificed is characterized as partisan adversary. But my challenge to people like this would be what if it was your son, husband, or father that had to be the sacrificial lamb? I doubt mama Beard would just want 'ALL women believed' if it were her son's freedom and/or reputation at stake in a similar situation.
Image
User avatar
DreadNaught
 
Posts: 13785
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 9:18 am
Has thanked: 557 times
Been thanked: 598 times

Previous

post

Return to Politics and Religion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ken Carson and 20 guests