The Limits of ‘Believe All Women’

Article here. Excerpt:

'In less than two months we’ve moved from uncovering accusations of criminal behavior (Harvey Weinstein) to criminalizing behavior that we previously regarded as presumptuous and boorish (Glenn Thrush). In a climate in which sexual mores are transforming so rapidly, many men are asking: If I were wrongly accused, who would believe me?

I know the answer that many women would give — are giving — is: Good. Be scared. We have been scared for forever. It’s your turn for some sleepless nights. They’ll say: If some innocent men go down in the effort to tear down the patriarchy, so be it.
...
Ms. Lindin was widely criticized, but say this much for her: At least she had the guts to publicly articulate a view that so many women are sharing with one another in private. Countless innocent women have been robbed of justice, friends of mine insist, so why are we agonizing about the possibility of a few good men going down?

I think the worry is justified. And it’s not because I don’t get the impulse to burn it all down. It’s because I think that “believing all women” can rapidly be transmogrified into an ideological orthodoxy that will not serve women at all.
...
I believe that the “believe all women” vision of feminism unintentionally fetishizes women. Women are no longer human and flawed. They are Truth personified. They are above reproach.

I believe that it’s condescending to think that women and their claims can’t stand up to interrogation and can’t handle skepticism. I believe that facts serve feminists far better than faith. That due process is better than mob rule.

Maybe it will happen tomorrow or maybe next week or maybe next month. But the Duke lacrosse moment, the Rolling Stone moment, will come. A woman’s accusation will turn out to be grossly exaggerated or flatly untrue. And if the governing principle of this movement is still an article of faith, many people will lose their religion. They will tear down all accusers as false prophets. And we will go back to a status quo in which the word of the Angelos is more sacred than the word of the Isabellas.'

up
69 users have voted.
I like this

Comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

How to spot xenophobia, lesson #6758

America, ca. 1840: "The only good Indian's a dead one."
Germany, ca. 1940: "The only good Jew's a dead one."
The West, ca. 2040: "The only good man's a dead one."

Well, I doubt 2040'll be quite that bad. But a cavalier disregard for the basic decencies of humanity, including giving any given person a fair shake and consideration out of shared human natures is how a lot of injustices get perpetuated. A full-on war of extermination need not be in place. A simple, "Well, he/she's a ______, why does anyone care so much about their guilt or innocence? Locking him/her up can really only make life better for the rest of us, so who cares if he/she gets a fair shake?" One need not have such a lengthy internal dialog to have attitudes amount to the same thing. Man = Person of Little Account, therefore, so what if he's getting railroaded or falsely-accused, or getting 10x the grief for something a woman'd get? I.e... who gives a fuck about some man?

People he knows personally may care. But such people are a tiny minority and unless they are powerful enough themselves, they probably won't be able to influence events so as to stop a blatant miscarriage of justice in some context. Man = guilty, no matter what, because we don't give a shit about him anyway.

No, to destroy a class of person, you need not round them up and kill them. You need only be indifferent to them. It's esp. bad when it is members of that same class who are as indifferent to other members as anyone else is. Then, just wait. Like water wearing away at a stone, over time, that group's fortunes wane. Need you examples? How are Europe's Romani (so-called Gypsies) faring? Among others, they too were targeted by the Nazis for extermination. And now this is less than a footnote in the history texts. To this day, how are they faring? Answer: Not well. This is because much of the rest of Europe is indifferent to them much of the time, rejecting the rest of it.

Native Americans: the typical American is indifferent to them. Contrast them with another small particular lifestyle group, such as for example the Amish. If the measles were to sweep through Amish communities in Pennsylvania, killing 1 in 5 children, would you care? Probably. Now, the same thing happens to the Seneca Indians in upstate NY. Do you care? Probably not.

Women suffer sexual harassment. Do you care? Yes. Men suffer both that and false accusations of it. Do you care? MANN readers do, most of them. But does the typical modern person, of either sex, in America? Most would say they are indifferent to it or, as some are now saying, fine, so be it.

This is how indifference works. I guess the question modern western society must now ask itself, if it even bothers to, is this: How will society fare when half its population has no representation when its interest in matters calling for justice come under fire? Can we foresee the outcomes?

Actually, we can. While men *as such* may have not been quite targeted this way in the past, subgroups of men have been. When you look at how things fared for those groups as a whole, and how indeed, it affected the women and children in their lives also, you see that things did not work out well for them, and eventually, the negative consequences impacted their larger societies. Is it fair to say that injustices permitted against one person or type of person eventually reduce the entire society? Yes, it is.

As always with my posts, I conclude with... we shall see.

up
6 users have voted.
I like this

looks like feminists

have finally found the perfect weapon to destroy any man, anytime.

how? make false accusations of rape, molestation, d.v., assault, harassment, etc. against a man (or category of men) who must be removed from his/their positions of power for women to advance.

penalty? practically none for females. sometimes they get slapped w/ a 'filing a false police report' charge. most of the time (in the u.s.) this does not happen. even if it does, the charge is only a misdemeanor. false accusations can harm everything around a man, including his family, his lifestyle, his employment status, his future, his freedom, his marital status, his relationship w/ his children, and on and on. remember, in most cases, the female's identity is totally protected, even if she does this repeatedly, or often. the male is often perp-walked out of his home/place of employment, has his name and pix published EVERYWHERE, and can even be singled out for harassment anywhere he goes, even w/ his family. this happens well before ANY judgement by a legal body has been made, or will ever be made. and false accusations can be made by anyone against any man. just a whisper of a child (under 18 yo) sexual encounter can have the same effect as what is described above.

rewards? many, $$, revenge (the list is long) to include civil seizures of a man's wealth and destruction of his status, reputation and his ability to function as a part of civil society.

nowadays, feminists (i.e. the democratic party) have learned to refine their/its attacks. they hear/seek out a rumor (true or not), maybe from decades before, and wait for just the right time to bring it to light. nothing can be proven. nothing can be disproven either. but, if timed just right, it can (and obviously does) make a tremendous impact on an election, or an appointment, or a judgement in a divorce, or a myriad of other situations.

let's face facts, when it comes to destroying a man, any man, a false accusation is a nuke in a briefcase. easy to slip into the activities, and devastating in its effects.

examples? male school teachers went nearly extinct decades ago. very few men are brave/foolish enough to pursue a career teaching children, especially female children. false accusations can be made for thousands of reasons.

today, it is sheer folly for any man to be alone behind closed doors w/ any female, maybe w/ the exception of his mother. the potential ramifications are horrendous, the reward$ can be monumental, and the penalty for not telling the truth for females, nonexistent.

up
6 users have voted.
I like this

Any man, any time

Behind or not behind closed doors, doesn't matter. All she has to do is level an accusation no matter how unlikely. Minimizing contact with females though does reduce your chances.

Once the sex-bot droids are up to snuff, you won't even need to risk it from some hooker or girl who makes a go for you. You'll be able to avoid them altogether and if you work in a MALE-DOMINATED line of work you may be able to keep them away from you entirely. Still, the risk will always be there.

up
5 users have voted.
I like this