Regular people calling feminists on their bullshit

Started by Amber, Sep 04, 2003, 12:43 AM

previous topic - next topic
Go Down

Amber

Letter to the Editor
False charges do exist in sexual assault cases
It's a good thing the jury charged with deciding Anwar Phillips' fate was more objective than Jill Wood is able to be. From the tone of her letter ("Verdict in Phillips trial will hurt future victims," Sept. 2) it seems that she cannot envision a world in which a woman would lie about consensual sex.

At least she recognizes her newspaper snatching analogy as absurd. But it doesn't stop her from continuing to use it. Does that, by association, make her absurd?

A jury of 12 people listened to all the facts in the case and determined that the defendant was not guilty. Jill Wood heard the accuser's view and has decided the defendant should be lynched. I guess that whole Constitutional thing about fair trials doesn't mean anything to Ms. Wood. You'd think she would be upset that false accusations like the charges leveled against Phillips make proving actual assault cases more difficult.

Here's something to ponder, Jill. Plenty of us, men and women alike, have had sexual experiences that we regret or would undo if we could. But most of us don't try to wreck someone's life because of it.


Tom DuSold
senior - history
he men's movement is a hate movement.  

What feminism is to men; the men's rights movement is to women.

Men's rights activists blame misandry for all their problems in the same way that feminists blame the patriarchy.

The only thing men's rights activists are good at is abusing women.  

And you can quote me on that.  :D

dr e

Excellent!  Great to see people stepping up and, well, standing their ground.
Contact dr e  Lifeboats for the ladies and children, icy waters for the men.  Women have rights and men have responsibilties.

Bilbo

Hear! Hear!
Do you have a link to the paper, Amber?
It is impossible to reason a man out of something he was never reasoned into in the first place- Swift

"The cardinal principle of judicial restraint--if it is not necessary to decide more, it is necessary not to decide more."

D

"I guess that whole Constitutional thing about fair trials doesn't mean anything to Ms. Wood."


This is the Stalinistic approach to doing criminal law. It's virtually everwhere now.  Especially just in sexual harrassment shit in all institutions.  Those places don't even allow the accused to know who the accuser is in many cases.

This idea was used heavily in Soviet Russia and Red China. It was their founding principle in fact (probably as it maintained power).  It's not new to history just in Soviet Russia either.

Americans really have to discard their chivilry in regards to objectivety in these cases.   More innocent people have gone to jail because of sexual assault and domestic violence than any other crime there is.  The criminal law on the matters are vague at best, the determination of guilt is even vaguer.

Women can get pissy all they want but sooner or later these laws will be just as heavily enforced against them.  Then you'll be hearing why didn't men do more to stop it.  :roll:    :D

Amber

Everything I put up as letters to the editor is from http://www.collegian.psu.edu.

It is currently up in the opinions page.  I'm too lazy to get you an exact link right now.

:)
he men's movement is a hate movement.  

What feminism is to men; the men's rights movement is to women.

Men's rights activists blame misandry for all their problems in the same way that feminists blame the patriarchy.

The only thing men's rights activists are good at is abusing women.  

And you can quote me on that.  :D

SacredNaCl

Dan,   I somehow doubt that the laws will ever be enforced in the same manner for women offenders.   My daughters mother is the poster child for evil abusive woman.  Let me describe a situation with law enforcement and her:


The first was arond 13 years ago. She was throwing things at me, yelling, throwing a tantrum.  Some heavy, some not so heavy. Books, remote controls, ashtrays, a chair, coffee cups & glasses, coasters, pretty much anything she could get her hands on.  I had taken it all morning, and by afternoon I simply wasn't going to take it anymore. I put her stuff out on the lawn & told her "Get the fuck out & don't come back."  Of course, she followed me out onto the lawn and hit me in the back of the head with something large and hard, it made me bleed. I simply walked back into the house and locked her out & put the chain on the door.  She screamed "I'll have you arrested for kidnapping". I told her, "If you want to take our daughter with you...Go ahead, but you are going to have to take at least 10 steps back for me to open this door."  She took them. I brought our daughter out in her car seat. She lunged at me with a large flashlight, I closed the door.   20 minutes later, police arrive and threaten *me*.  Not all of these officers saw the massive piles of broken things in my house, they saw the blood dripping from my head, the bruises on my face, and shoulders, and chest from having things hurled at me... Did they arrest her? No, they threatened to arrest *me* for "endangering a minor".  I told them my daughter is able to stay, but her mother absolutely has to go, I'm not going to put up with being assaulted in my own home.  Did they even talk to her about the horrendous tantrum she threw? No, they continued to look for any excuse to arrest me, and when they couldn't find one they tried to play some BS that I should allow her back in.   In the end they "asked" her to leave, and she left and stayed gone for many months (thank you) and no one was arrested.  If I had done anything in the slightest, believe me I would of been arrested.
reedom Is Merely Privilege Extended Unless Enjoyed By One & All.

Go Up