The Supreme Court

[BurtReynolds]

yeah I watched a couple of clips. I'll have to check out the whole thing.

Im not so bad burt. Im complete opposite of you, but im not a SJW. You might be a KKK member, but i am not what you accuse me of. so fuck you.

You're just a silly pants pot smoker. Fucking hippy. Mostly harmless though

but i dont actually smoke pot. or take edibles. or ay of it.

I think I might start selling it.

Why would you do such a thing

poisoning the youth.

and apparently weed stocks are through the roof. I missed the boat on that.

[B]

Meanwhile, empowering the #believewomen lynch mob and the despicable and fundamentally unjust idea behind it (not to mention the harassment and tactics) is a huge deal . And it can be dented here (though truthfully this sick idea has already probably won as well. Good going, you dopes).

There's only one type of guy worried about the "#believewomen lunch money," Burt.

Young black men put in prison for decades or lynched? Is that the type you're referring to?

Black men convicted 20-30 years ago? That's tragic, but hardly appicable to events of this week.

[BurtReynolds]

Meanwhile, empowering the #believewomen lynch mob and the despicable and fundamentally unjust idea behind it (not to mention the harassment and tactics) is a huge deal . And it can be dented here (though truthfully this sick idea has already probably won as well. Good going, you dopes).

There's only one type of guy worried about the "#believewomen lunch money," Burt.

Young black men put in prison for decades or lynched? Is that the type you're referring to?

Black men convicted 20-30 years ago? That's tragic, but hardly appicable to events of this week.

It's very applicable. People didn't suddenly stop making shit up since the late 80s. If it can nearly take down a supreme court justice, what hope does some random on the street have?

this one's from a week ago:

Rape charges against 4 California dentists dismissed after video contradicts woman's story
https://news3lv.com/news/local/four-cal ... mans-story


I'm sure we all have cognitive dissonance to some degree, but I can't understand how anyone can keep the following two beliefs in their head at the same time:

1. presumption of innocence is necessary in a just society.
2. if one is accused of rape, they are guilty of rape.

They are completely incompatible beliefs! You can't have both, and considering one is the foundation upon which justice in a civilized world is built, you can't get rid of that one. The other is easily disprovable nonsense!

A crime being particularly heinous, difficult to prove, or effecting certain members of society more than others is not a valid excuse to automatically believe accusers. That's patently insane!

[Strat]

But, fine, there are some points in there but posting some stupid fucking internet meme to prove your point is exactly what you fucking hate from the left.

Ugh.

[Strat]

LOOK AT THESE FOUR THAT WERE WRONGFULLY ACCUSED, THEREFORE WE SHOULDNT BELIEVE ANYBODY!

"im not saying they all do but look at this stupid fucking photo i posted pointing out 4 that were wrongfully accused to prove my point on a wider issue that requires much more nuance and legit conversation over"

is what your stupid meme says.

C'mon Burt. If some fucking leftie posted something similar you'd be shitting yourself.

[BurtReynolds]

But, fine, there are some points in there but posting some stupid fucking internet meme to prove your point is exactly what you fucking hate from the left.

Ugh.

what internet meme?! They are real life stories! Jesus christ.

LOOK AT THESE FOUR THAT WERE WRONGFULLY ACCUSED, THEREFORE WE SHOULDNT BELIEVE ANYBODY!

\

Yes! YES EXACTLY! Some people are wrongly accused of crimes, therefore we must have a presumption of innocence! THAT's THE WHOLE REASON IT EXISTS

[Strat]

EVERYONE PLEASE SHARE THIS WITH ALL THE PEOPLE WHO SAY WOMEN DONT LIE!

[Strat]

LIKE AND SHARE IF YOU AGREE THAT SOME WOMEN LIE

[BurtReynolds]

Here are 70 more: https://twitter.com/nickmon1112/status/ ... 8135011328

what is the correct number you need?

[Strat]

Do you want me to start posting stats on men thrown in jail for assaulting women? because that is the other end of the spectrum that you are working at right now.

Point is, you are exactly what you hate...just on the other end of the spectrum. think.

[BurtReynolds]

Do you want me to start posting stats on men thrown in jail for assaulting women? because that is the other end of the spectrum that you are working at right now.

Point is, you are exactly what you hate...just on the other end of the spectrum. think.

Will any of those stats justify believing someone is guilty without evidence in your mind?

Then tell me "...therefore, when someone is accused of rape, they are guilty and should be punished."

Look, I have the easier argument here. All I have to prove is that it does happen, and that will be enough to prove that presumption of guilt is morally untenable. Most people agree that it is far more preferable to let many guilty people go free than one innocent person be punished for a crime he didn't commit. This isn't some new principle. I'm not arguing something controversial.

That's why posting a few examples of false rape allegations happening is valid. All of the stats in the world showing that rape actually happens won't change that. Unless you can show that false allegations never happen, you have to accept the fact that evidence is required.

[BurtReynolds]

I understand why you are saying that. A few instances doesn't prove a trend. I get that. but this is a different circumstance: it does prove that it exists, and it doesn't matter if it happens 1 out of ten times or 1 out of a thousand. The fact that it happens is enough to prove that #believevictims is wrong.

[BurtReynolds]

Addams has a great quote about it, but there are others.

[Strat]

Do you want me to start posting stats on men thrown in jail for assaulting women? because that is the other end of the spectrum that you are working at right now.

Point is, you are exactly what you hate...just on the other end of the spectrum. think.

Will any of those stats justify believing someone is guilty without evidence in your mind?

Then tell me "...therefore, when someone is accused of rape, they are guilty and should be punished."

Look, I have the easier argument here. All I have to prove is that it does happen, and that will be enough to prove that presumption of guilt is morally untenable. Most people agree that it is far more preferable to let many guilty people go free than one innocent person be punished for a crime he didn't commit. This isn't some new principle. I'm not arguing something controversial.

That's why posting a few examples of false rape allegations happening is valid. All of the stats in the world showing that rape actually happens won't change that. Unless you can show that false allegations never happen, you have to accept the fact that evidence is required.

This all starts with the Kavanaugh shit so ill stick with that. Add with that, i can't even speak anything more than the rape allegation without you accusing me of a handful of other liberal tear/political hack/old white man commentary that you have in your back pocket.

Alas, Burt you are a smart man. A hot head on the verge of death being your greatest achievement, but a smart man. Nobody here, in this thread, on this board, and 99% of liberal leaning people - are stating the woman should be believed without a shred of proof. You are completely missing the nuance of this discussion from the other side that you so detest. Yes, men have been wrongfully accused (young men have it so hard these days!!!), and also women...every single fucking one of them.....have been assaulted in one way or another. Every one of them. Harassed, assaulted, whatever you want to call it. This is not your experience because you are a male. The other night my mother was so fucking emotional she opened up to me that she was attacked when she was younger too. Thast fucking heartbreaking and also not surprising at all.

Men have been fucking horrible to women, including you, which also includes your commentary towards the entire situation now. THis is not attacking you and the good things you have done in life, but this is also pointing out that you, as a fucking man, have been the dominant creature since the dawn of time.

Okay, in the court of law, i absolutely agree there is not enough evidence to convict him as a sexual predator. No shit. I get that. So do all of us left leaning liberal SJW hippies or whatever name you want to call us. The point is, this fucking guy has put himself.... by choice...in the biggest spotlight on the world stage - to become a supreme court justice. He has been accused, not convicted, but accused by a very credible woman of sexual assault. Its been fucking chaos. This has opened wounds for a lot of fucking women across the land who have also dealt with these things. These women have been afraid of coming forward or even speaking out against men who have treated them this way for the exact fucking reasons that the GOP, you, and many other men have treated the situation over the past couple of weeks. You have a heart, i know you do. You wouldnt draw such beautiful art without it....(i hate you)

You talk about identity politics and how you are above it (lol) but here we are.....

This isn't about evidence that he raped her. Its not. Its bigger than that and its a discussion that is happening because men have dominated women in every sense of the word for as long as we've been around.

This guy shouldnt be on the supreme court, he also shouldnt be a criminal!. THis conversation should be happening. Women should be upset over it and its not about fucking SJW attacking old white men for no reason.

The GOP should have pulled him, put another conservative judge up, and they would have gone on their marry way. But they didnt, they bet on their pony during a time of reckoning for men in the public eye and it s big fuck you to many people who deserve and have a right to feel the way they do.


Also, Trump wins. So, here we are.

/Rant

Also im drunk so fuck.

[Strat]

Addams has a great quote about it, but there are others.

Again...this isn't about guilt or innocence...and you can argue about "moving the goal posts" but this is a much bigger discussion tha tthe GOP doesnt want to have because ultimately they will lose*

*not because they are louder, meaner, and more aggressive and better at everything.

[Strat]

and also, yes, with his bullshit testimony the goal posts did move to temperament. No fucking human being who peddles stupid conspiracy theory about he fucking clintons (or anyone!) should be on the fucking court. So the republicans, should have stood up for at least the good of law......

But the lefties aren't the only tribal warriors in this fight.

And i agree with you...we're all doomed and maybe we should all burn down.

[The Argonaut]

There's a case to be made that the GOP had set the goalposts at temperment from the beginning. Rushing this thing along, the odd way the W White House documents were screened, letting him get away with refusing to answer just about any question of substance, and harping on and on about how he is a good boss, a friendly neighbor, and a kind basketball coach. When he proved himself to not actually have a judicial temperment by ranting and raving about liberal conspiracies, the GOP moved the goalposts to "you can't prove that he assaulted anyone, so that is good enough".

[Strat]

There's a case to be made that the GOP had set the goalposts at temperment from the beginning. Rushing this thing along, the odd way the W White House documents were screened, letting him get away with refusing to answer just about any question of substance, and harping on and on about how he is a good boss, a friendly neighbor, and a kind basketball coach. When he proved himself to not actually have a judicial temperment by ranting and raving about liberal conspiracies, the GOP moved the goalposts to "you can't prove that he assaulted anyone, so that is good enough".

I do believe the GOP has set the standard here, not the liberal SJW's.

[Jorge]

My take on the #BelieveWomen thing is: I have witnessed how difficult & scary it can be to come forward with a story of sexual assault, especially when it's against a person with power. My ex girlfriend saw that paralyzing, all-consuming fear every day at the foundation she ran. Not only do you have to deal with the personal and professional ramifications of an accusation like that, but you also have to brace for the immediate knee-jerk reaction of a larger audience, be it family, friends, or the public at large. That knee-jerk reaction is still -- despite the "woke" age we live in -- to be disbelieving, skeptical, and victim-blamey. I'm sure Burt will question this, because he thinks the world has collectively morphed into a SJW twitter mob, but I've seen it, and it is prevalent. This is anecdotal and irrelevant, of course; the point is: I understand the impetus behind #BelieveWomen. The idea, as I understand it, is to create a safer, more welcoming environment for victims to come forward and make those accusations, because that's part of how you fix shit. I personally have not come across anyone who argues that a victim's word alone should be enough to throw someone in jail. I'm sure they exist, but that's not what I believe the "movement" (if you can call it that?) to be about.

Here's the part of the post where Burt starts nodding along in agreement: #BelieveWomen (and its more extreme Pokemon evolution, #BelieveAllWomen) is inherently fallacious. Of course people lie. There are shitty, insane, evil people out there and it is outright naive to say that there aren't people who will take advantage of the political climate to bring someone else down. It is obvious to me that there should never be laws passed that are based around the cultural shift of something like #BelieveWomen. That is terrifying and dangerous, because the presumption of innocence is sacrosanct as a pillar of any rational justice system. I've seen the way the mindless horde will run with a concept like #BelieveWomen and take it to absurd lengths: a person of note is accused, however vaguely or anonymously, and they are immediately ripe for a dragging. This is because the moral righteousness that comes from feeling like one is on the "right side of history" is so fucking addictive. It's like a drug. Having carte blanche to destroy someone is fun. And this is disturbing, because an innocent person's reputation can be ruined because of something someone said somewhere. It's ugly. It's wrong. And I think it is fucked that having nuanced, complicated feelings on this topic will make you a villain in some people's eyes. I don't #BelieveAllWomen; I believe in giving people the benefit of the doubt while also creating an environment of empathy and understanding that will hopefully motivate more victims to come forward. We should be empathetic, but we should also be discerning.

On Kavanaugh: I don't like him. I believe that he did it. I acknowledge that there is no evidence and that the accusation alone should not be enough to derail his nomination (and certainly not enough to prosecute him for anything). But I don't think it is desperate straw-grabbing to suggest that his composure and temperament should call his fitness into question.

[BurtReynolds]

First of all good rant. I disagree of course, but at least it's thought out.

Nobody here, in this thread, on this board, and 99% of liberal leaning people - are stating the woman should be believed without a shred of proof.

I'm pretty sure B disagrees with you. Probably a few others. I would be happy if they chime in and say they don't actually believe that. And I hate to break it to you, but in fact millions if not tens of millions of people quite literally believe that #believewomen means that if someone accuses someone of rape, they are telling the truth. This is an actual thing. Some have argued that it only means that rape allegations should be taken seriously, but if that's the case, then they are arguing with a straw man, because no one is disagreeing. That isn't what it means though.

Yes, men have been wrongfully accused (young men have it so hard these days!!!), and also women...every single fucking one of them.....have been assaulted in one way or another.

Basically everyone on earth has been assaulted in one way or another. Actually, men are more likely to be physically assaulted. But yes, I'm sure every woman on the planet has been harassed and many have been sexually assaulted. That doesn't change anything I'm arguing.

The other night my mother was so fucking emotional she opened up to me that she was attacked when she was younger too. Thast fucking heartbreaking and also not surprising at all.

yes, its terrible. That doesn't justify believing someone is guilty of being a rapist without evidence (and I'm not saying that you shouldn't believe her either. You know her better than anyone. That in itself is evidence on a personal level).

Men have been fucking horrible to women, including you

no I haven't. At least no more than I have treated men badly. I'm an equal opportunity asshole.

Okay, in the court of law, i absolutely agree there is not enough evidence to convict him as a sexual predator. No shit. I get that. So do all of us left leaning liberal SJW hippies or whatever name you want to call us.

No I assure you this isn't the case.

The point is, this fucking guy has put himself.... by choice...in the biggest spotlight on the world stage - to become a supreme court justice. He has been accused, not convicted, but accused by a very credible woman of sexual assault.

ok.

This has opened wounds for a lot of fucking women across the land who have also dealt with these things. These women have been afraid of coming forward or even speaking out against men who have treated them this way for the exact fucking reasons that the GOP, you, and many other men have treated the situation over the past couple of weeks.

I'm sure the first part is true. I'm sure this has been difficult for many of them. The GOP isn't treating them badly by questioning these allegations, and no, any defense of Kavanaugh is not an attack on these women.

You talk about identity politics and how you are above it (lol) but here we are.....

This isn't about evidence that he raped her. Its not. Its bigger than that and its a discussion that is happening because men have dominated women in every sense of the word for as long as we've been around.

This I very much disagree with. It's not bigger than that. It's about AN INDIVIDUAL being accused of rape, and there being no evidence whatsoever that he did it. Whatever is going on in society is not bigger than that. Society doesn't override that. We don't make exceptions because there is supposedly something more important going on.

This guy shouldnt be on the supreme court, he also shouldnt be a criminal!. THis conversation should be happening. Women should be upset over it and its not about fucking SJW attacking old white men for no reason.

that's a fine conversation to have. But him being accused of a crime is not in itself a disqualifier, any more than any other job (I also think its despicable when athletes and others are fired for being accused of crimes as well).

The GOP should have pulled him, put another conservative judge up, and they would have gone on their marry way. But they didnt, they bet on their pony during a time of reckoning for men in the public eye and it s big fuck you to many people who deserve and have a right to feel the way they do.

They shouldn't have pulled him just because its an important issue and women are assaulted in society and people feel bad. They shouldn't empower the idea that someone's life, reputation, career, whatever can be derailed so easily. They also shouldn't empower the idea that its ok to call people who disagree with you a rape apologist/sexist/mysogynist/etc or that harassing people who disagree with you is ok. They absolutely did the right thing here by not setting that precedent.

/Rant

Also im drunk so fuck.

It's a fine rant. Finally someone made an argument that isnt (entirely) "oh yeah, you're just an incel rape apologist".