A story in the news today underscores the following: If the sexual grievance industry is so terribly concerned that false rape claims garner too much publicity, they need to tell police to stop panicking communities every time a troubled young woman wanders in the police station looking for her 15 minutes of fame with a cockamamie rape tale.
Because every time police panic a community by telling newspapers that a rape occurred on the basis of nothing more than a girl's say so and it turns out that no rape occurred (and that is incredibly common), the community seethes, and citizens remember it the next time.
With the epidemic of false rape claims we're seeing, how long will it be before every community has been panicked by a sensational false rape claim?
And how easy is it to get a truly impartial jury for a rape claim in a community that's been burned by a rape lie? Seriously?
Today's news gives us yet another example (and it seems we have one of these stories every day): The Ottawa Citizen ran a headline on January 22: "Barrhaven schools on high alert after brazen sex attack on teen." The story said this: "Police are looking for a middle-aged man after the teenager, who was walking alone on Tartan Drive at about 9:45 a.m., was approached by an unknown man driving an older red four-door SUV with winter tires and no hub caps, similar to a Ford Escape or Explorer. It had two front bucket seats, but the rear seats had been removed. The vehicle had no front licence plate. Police said the SUV may have been registered in Quebec or the suspect could have removed the front plate to avoid being identified by the victim. The man asked for directions, then forced the young woman into the vehicle at gunpoint. He sexually assaulted her before dropping her off at the Fallowfield Park and Ride, police said. . . . ." The story proceeded to describe the man with great particularity.
The Ottawa Citizen's coverage of this particular rape claim was typical. An teenager's allegation was treated as 100% Gospel. It was a sensational rape claim that panicked an entire community.
Alas, as is so incredibly common in these cases, police now say it didn't happen. And the community isn't happy about it.
The Toronto Sun today reports: "Teen's false rape claim upsets neighbours." The locals are "seething," and some want the girl to apologize because there needs to be repercussions. Unfortunately, the young woman won't be charged, even though law enforcement admitted what she did was a crime. No explanation is provided, but isn't that a wonderful message to be sending to other would-be false rape accusers? Rape is treated as the second most serious of all criminal offenses, but abusing the power to cry "rape" is not punished. This is fair, how?
Here is the story in today's Toronto Sun:
Teen's false rape claim upsets neighbours
OTTAWA - Residents in a west-end neighbourhood are seething after learning a rape claim by a local teen turned out to be bogus.
Police announced Monday they have closed the books on the sexual assault investigation, saying rape claims made by the girl are "unsubstantiated" and "unfounded."
The 16-year-old won't face charges after she told police she was abducted at gunpoint and sexually assaulted in broad daylight on the morning of Jan. 18.
The two-week investigation had police canvassing the quiet neighbourhood and scouring footage from a Park and Ride lot where the teen claimed she was dumped after the assault.
"It's our belief the incident did not happen," said Sgt. Jeff Webster, who declined to comment on the investigation, saying it remains a "private" matter.
The girl provided police with a detailed description of her attacker and of the getaway vehicle in a case that sent shockwaves through a community still reeling from the 2005 murder of local teenager Jennifer Teague.
"That was the first thing I thought of when I first heard," said Tom Stone, 55, outside the Mac's convenience store on the corner where Teague was last seen alive.
"We believe we live in a quiet neighbourhood and all of a sudden, holy smokes, what's happening here? And in the middle of the day," said Stone, who has two young daughters and a teenaged son.
James Gilliland, president of the West Barrhaven Community Association, said residents are expressing both relief and frustration.
"On one hand, I'm relieved that it is a hoax and that means we don't have a predator trolling around our streets. On the other hand, it's frustrating that police resources were wasted on a hoax," said Gilliland, who said there was a heightened sense of concern in the community since the allegations first made headlines.
"With what happened to Jennifer Teague, it certainly had everyone on edge. I had some people calling for self-defence seminars, and I know parents were making sure their teenagers were keeping their cellphones on them at all times. We were concerned even with (a teenaged family friend) taking the bus here ... It certainly serves as a reminder that bad things can happen in good communities."
Galliland is among the many residents calling on the girl to issue an apology for duping police and the community.
"There should be some repercussions," he said.
Police said they considered charging the girl with public mischief, but declined to pursue criminal charges after consulting with the Crown Attorney's office.
"It is a crime to make a false police report, and in this case we've looked at that and, given all the circumstances, we're not going to lay a charge," Webster said.
Link: http://www.torontosun.com/news/canada/2011/02/01/17121921.html
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
35 comments:
The Ottawa Sun has a link to this story and it allows commenting.
Unlike the Toronto Sun link,Ottawa Citizen link, and CTV news online.
http://www.ottawasun.com/news/ottawa/2011/02/01/17115281.html
Please email Earl Mcrae at the Ottawa Sun who was suspicious of this incident from the get go.
earl.mcrae@sunmedia.ca
http://www.ottawasun.com/news/columnists/earl_mcrae/2011/01/20/16970476.html
Sorry for some reason it will not accept all of the link. Go to www.ottawasun.com and the story is one their main page. It allows comments. Earl Mcrae's email address is correct. To find the link to the original story go to the link below and find the story.
It is his January 20th column.
http://www.ottawasun.com/news/columnists/earl_mcrae/
http://www.ottawasun.com/news/columnists/
earl_mcrae/2011/01/20/
16970476.html
I just added a comment over there.
When law enforcement enable false rape accusers, they do a huge dis-service to the now very few that are telling the truth.
I am fairly certain that police generally do this to get leads and to have witnesses come forward. Police are probably more skeptical about these sorts of claims than anyone. The problem is that they USE our highly unsophisticated journalism profession to scare people. When it turns out to be a lie (and it almost always does -- seriously -- almost always), they've just planted in everyone's head not to trust rape claims. I don't know if it's a good thing for people to prejudge rape claims -- it's good that people approach these claims with a completely open mind. But at some point, there has to be a backlash, and the generaly public is going to say, "enough is enough -- I'm not buying any of it."
”Rape is treated as the second most serious of all criminal offenses…”
In regards to charging, prosecuting and sentencing, perhaps; but, as a reported crime, rape is taken way more seriously.
Your comments were sincere, accurate, and well-intentioned, so I don’t wish to come off as snarky in this remark, but, I would point out that from the “public perception” stand-point as well as the “police mobilization” efforts, a rape claim is taken way more seriously. Again, I’m not trying to be snarky here, but you’ll never see a situation in which someone comes into a police station claiming to have witnessed a murder, in which the police react by warning the public that there may be a murderer on the loose who may strike again.
That would be the “apples-to-apples” comparison.
But, to be fair, it is only rational for police to respond with a heightened level of seriousness to reports of a abduction and rape. If they failed to warn the public, and another assault occurred, they’d have Hell to pay for having not warned the public. They’re in a no-win situation, which essentially forces them to reacts as if each and every such claim is real, and act so as to provide a warning that there may be a continuing danger until such time as they can gather together the known facts.
And, yet, it is also fairly well known that true serial rapists take time to plan-out their attacks, and are unlikely to “strike” again soon after, instead taking time to let the initial heightened response die down, and to carefully select their next victim.
The reality is that those over-the-top reactions to rape reports are seldom going to be the least bit of good in actually preventing future attacks by serial rapists. They might help if they alert someone who might have seen something, but hadn’t linked it to any attack that occurred (which could tend to swing both ways, helping to uncover FRA’s as easily as identifying actual perpetrators. I’m reminded of a number of instance in which witnesses had seen the alleged victim quite happily going off with a man, presumably her lover, before her having reported a violent attack).
But, such over-the-top reactions are what the public has come to expect, and even demand of LE. Having woman be on guard for a few days doesn’t effectively deter determined rapists, but people do want to be informed.
"When law enforcement enable false rape accusers"
Could you explain how investigating claims and uncovering false allegations "enables" false accusers?
One would tend to conclude just the opposite. But, please, do attempt to explain.
”Rape is treated as the second most serious of all criminal offenses…”
I meant only in terms of average sentencing and should have made that clear.
"If they failed to warn the public, and another assault occurred, they’d have Hell to pay for having not warned the public."
Covering their asses doesn't account for the way they feed info to impressionable reporters looking for a scary story to boost interest in the news. They could have covered themselves here by relating that the only evidence they have for the entire claim was the say so of a 16-year-old girl and that they are investigating. I promise you that if the news people reported THAT, most people would look at the claim in a different light. The problem is when they talk about the alleged rape as a fact (as in Hofstra where we had a police Sgt. on camera who did this).
So go ahead and report what the girl claimed - just make sure to tell everyone that the word of the girl is ALL you have.
I have *long* said this, the actual paedophiles best friends are those who indulge in paedo hysteria, and the rapists best friends are those who indulge in rape hysteria, both provide the best camouflage possible for the actual paedophile/rapist, rare as they are.
Certainly in *my* case, there is now an extended family of some 50 adults of jury service age, and I'd guess around the same number of friends and acquaintances, all of whom would not convict any accused rapist on anything short of CCTV evidence plus the actual victim being in ITU, with the rape itself reported by the paramedics who picked her up.
that is around 0.1% of the total population for my town/city, and around 0.5% of the total jury eligible population... which is around 20,000
Do the math, that's per juror, for a jury of 12 you get 12 chances to select.
Basically this town just got a damn sight safer for the very very few actual rapists out there, all they have to do is select victims and scenarios that will boil down to he said/she said, and 0.5% of the total eligible jury pool will let them walk, guaranteed.
But, it gets worse...
None of these 0.5% of the eligible jury population are going to change their minds, far too dangerous to falsely accused innocent victims, until and unless the penalty for a rape conviction drops down to something in line with a common assault, eg maybe 12 months in prison, more than likely a fine or probabtion, and no sex offender nonsense.
That's the reality.
While I am/was demonstrably a target of an FRA, I am not a likely target of a rape, and frankly my sympathy and empathy for potential rape victims has also gone the way of the dodo.
FRA's *are* the terrorists of modern society, give me a moslem neighbour any day of the week, in preference to an empowered wimmin FRAccuser in pursuit of child custody or alimony or kicking the man out of the house.
For those who are new to this site, aside from being a brilliant commentator, AfOR was a victim of am FRA (false rape accusation). He won, but the price he paid was high.
By the protocol perversions that have been enacted into American law enforcement over the last 25 years, they have fostered a now "Culture of false Rape accusations".
The only way to return integrity to the rape accusation is to charge the ones that abuse the system by saying they were raped just to get back at their ex boyfriends.
S - ”By the protocol perversions that have been enacted into American law enforcement over the last 25 years, they have fostered a now "Culture of false Rape accusations".”
The problem with your deep, unmasked contempt for LE is that it blinds you to obvious truths while on your quest to try to blame the entire issue on LE.
Feminists sold “Rape Hysteria”, including the idea of re-imagining anything that a woman came to be uncomfortable with (even after-the-fact) as having been rape directly to the public, as it were.
As Dr. Eugene Kanin noted, such gender-feminists viewed (and still do) law enforcement as their adversaries. They portrayed the public picture of police who were unconcerned about women, who blamed woman for getting themselves raped, and who were less-than-helpful towards victims.
We still see the SGI doing that very same thing in their incessant whining that arrest, charging and conviction rates are well below where they believe they should be. Of course, your hatred has blinded you to such plainly, and painfully obvious realities.
Feminists did not go through LE to encourage more women to come forward with rape claims. They demanded that police go out of their way to make it easier and more “comfortable” for women to do so. To some extent, the police (who never were anti-woman, as the SGI portrays them) acquiesced to such demands. Still the reality remains that woman were making FRA’s long before the gender-feminists started making demands. You, yourself, often note the prevalence of FRA’s Antebellum and during the “Jin Crow” era. That’s back when police were supposedly so dismissive of women’s rape claims. The simple truth is that women have been making FRA’s down through the ages, as it would suit their purposes; from Potiphar’s wife to most any woman who’d been engaged in adultery. The option to cry rape has always existed for women, and many have undoubtedly used it – without one bit of encouragement from any form of law enforcement.
The hands of LE are not clean in regards to the FRA issue, to be sure. But, they are not the “genesis” of this false rape culture. They are but one player, and often not the most significant player at all. Here, in the story above, they were actually “the good guy’s”. But, again, your hatred blinds you from being able to see that, obvious as it is. You still wish to try to find some way, any way, to blame them instead of the women making the false accusation. I remember when you declared that you didn’t blame the women who accused you, just the police (who didn’t do what you wanted them to).
I look at the FRA issue and see plenty of blame to go around, with most of it belonging to those woman who make FRA’s. You look at the same issue, and see only the police as being culpable (with the accusers getting a free pass from you). Your lack of objectivity in regards to the issue is only too obvious.
Apparently the only thing that pisses off feminists more than not reporting "rapes" is reporting them.
"I look at the FRA issue and see plenty of blame to go around, with most of it belonging to those woman who make FRA’s."
Amen to that. And add to that the culture of enabling, tolerating, and tacitly encouraging rape liars to come forward as the price of battling rape, fueled by feminist rape reforms.
Archivist - "And add to that the culture of enabling, tolerating, and tacitly encouraging rape liars to come forward as the price of battling rape, fueled by feminist rape reforms."
I can remember "Rape Awareness" seminars on my college campus back in the early 80's. Advertised as a means of protecting women from being sexually assaulted, they actually spent more time (or so it seemed) focusing on encouraging women that, "if any thing happened to them that they didn't feel right about, they should come forward and talk to the "consolers" or report it to the police".
Funny thing though, there were no police around - no sign of them at all. It was just direct "marketing" by gender-feminists of their "Rape Hysteria" and tacit approval of FRA's to their (female) public. [Us guy's were just informed that we were all potential rapist A-holes who needed to keep ourselves under control]
Wish I'd known then what I know now.
Mr Werner, with all due respect sir, American gender-raunch feminists are gonna try and gain "Empowerment" by any means possible, and they have rooted their perversion into American law enforcement to do just that.
When American law enforcement arrest an innocent man on domestic violence charges, hold him in jail until he pleads guilty to a lessor charge; and then take this "manufactured statistic" and cash it in for federal VAWA dollars, this is unconstitutional.
When American law enforcement label a false rape accusation as "unfounded", this again is faulty and misleading misinformation that prejudices against the innocent.
The biggest effect that would unfold if American law enforcement were to start holding women accountable for their transgressions..would be the disembowelment of the "American Gender-Raunch Empowerment movement".
Thats why Gender-Raunch holds onto their American law enforcement misinformation Alliance with both hands.
slw, when I think of all the crap we used to put up with as callow young men, it is unbelievable.
A big part of the problem is that on college campuses, most of the young men (there are exceptions) are like lambs who aren't sufficiently sure of themselves to assert themselves or to fight back. They fear appearing to be unreasonable or unenlightened, and the result is that there is zero dialogue on campus about these issues. There is the gender feminist view, backed by manhating adults with PhDs and tenure, pitted against the sheepish boys who just go along.
What college campuses need is you and me.
S - ”When American law enforcement arrest an innocent man on domestic violence charges, hold him in jail until he pleads guilty to a lessor charge; and then take this "manufactured statistic" and cash it in for federal VAWA dollars, this is unconstitutional.”
Still with the BS about LE cashing in via VAWA, despite the fact that LE gets but a pittance, and has to beg for every scrap of that? As you should already know, VAWA primarily (over-whelming) benefits those agencies calling themselves (women’s) victim advocates. The “sales pitch” for VAWA was that it would fund LE, but that was just fanfare and empty promises. Feminist who backed the Act never intended for male-dominated patriarchal LE agencies to benefit, and they won’t stand by a let VAWA end up in the pockets of “men”. That’s why something like 90% of VAWA money goes to women’s advocacy groups. What little LE gets, they must “justify” by committing to yet greater departmental expenditures in order to get a fraction of the cost via (single-instance) VAWA grants.
Yeah, they sold it as a comprehensive package which would include LE, but it’s easy to find out (remember all those links I gave you?) that LE is an “outsider”, and mostly just burdened by the numerous “unfunded mandates” of VAWA. LE isn’t “cashing-in”, not even close. They incur far more costs in trying to meet the mandates of VAWA than they can ever hope to be compensated for by it.
If LE were simply motivated by the money, as you suggest, then it would make far more sense for them to try to ignore DV and rape claims, so as to not have to incur the expense, and to not have the statistics derived from their reporting of those crimes constantly thrown back into their faces by whining women’s advocates for never doing “enough” and for allowing so many woman to be harmed or killed via their incompetence and inaction. Nice how they view this “alliance” you’ve imagined. They see the patriarchal police as “the enemy” who’s only out to protect and excuse men.
That those claiming to advocate for women hate the police even more than you (and some others in the MRM) do might be a fairly good indication that they are no allies of feminists. As the fact that they are the ones who (mostly) uncover and expose false rape allegations [including the new & improved version where they’re not rushing to arrest innocent men nearly as often] might also serve to do.
Too bad you are too lacking of an open mind to even consider anything beyond your own, self-invented notions.
It IS amazing what men are putting up with these days.
My husband and I watched The Girl With The Dragon Tatoo, and The Girl Who Played With Fire with english subtitles recently.
What galled me was he actually thought the books were "good" and so were the movies.
I have not read the books, but pointed out to him the relentless theme of male rape and brutality, lesbian love, and a heroine who could whip ass at every turn.
"Don't you think setting your father on fire for "abusing" your helpless mother is a tad extreme?
Or her "therapist" saying she was "allegedly" insane for doing such an extreme thing?
The daddy hating scenes where she whapped her burn scarred daddy in the head and leg with an ax, and shot at her brother - who of course brutalized, shot and buried her alive to "deserve" it.
Crying out loud!
It was amazing he didnt' see what was going on...
Readers are reminded about this aspect of our comments policy:
"This blog is dedicated to giving voice to, and raising awareness about the problems encountered by, persons falsely and wrongfly accused of rape and sexual assault. We welcome any comments consistent with that mission. We do not tolerate comments inconsistent with that mission or that minimize or trivialize the importance of that mission."
Comments will be deleted when appropriate, and from now on, comments responding to the deleted comment will also be deleted.
Anonymous - ” I'm sure you already know that Liz Seccuro's book is out.”
[Taking your points/questions in reverse order]
No, I wasn’t. Actually, I had to look up the name. Turns out I’d heard her story before, but did not recognize her by name.
”Then there is UVA -- they're in a spin. For years, the "uva administration" has frowned at victims reporting rape outside of the uva realm.” What do you make of it?
Actually, by my calculations, 1984 was over a quarter of a century ago. Whatever UVA may have done regarding rape (claims) back then is unlikely to have any reflection of their policies today. Given the nature of litigations over the past 20+ years, I doubt that there is one single college throughout eth US that would even think to try to keep a young woman from reporting a sexual assault to police. Of course, one can find untold numbers of woman still claiming, to this day, that either police or school administrators refused to listen to nor investigate their allegations. I tend to call BS, as I know full well the reality is that such situations are but one audio recording away from a multi-million dollar law suit. I chalk them up to fabrications intended to stoke feminist anti-police, anti-male authority fires.
One might say that some men have likewise fabricated ordeals with FRA’s. But, the difference I’d point out is that there are literally hundreds of documented cases in which such horrors have actually been visited upon men in recent years. And, those are just the ones in which the FRA was eventually uncovered/admitted. What we don’t see regarding women’s claims that police would take their allegations seriously, or that college officials tried to silence them is the comparable “fall-out” from when some of these cases get exposed (a simple recording would easily do the trick). And, given the amount of law-suit money that would have trial lawyers circling, the fact that we aren’t seeing any such suits is likely a very reliable indicator that the claims of indifference and silencing aren’t legit.
”Slwerner, there was another "reported" rape at UGA this week. Think of the dozens that are "not" reported.”
It’s unfortunate that rapes do occur. Even if Kanin’s research is representative, and 40+% of rape claims are false, that still leaves 60% of those made which are possibly true. Even laying aside the “he said/she said” variety, we can still know that some rapes are definitely true since, unfortunately, there’s often the body of the abduction/rape/murder victim to make it perfectly clear.
But, what we cannot know is just how many actual rapes go unreported. I’m certain that many do, but as Pierce has detailed numerous times, there is no way anyone can put an accurate number of them.
That said, I’m not willing to simply accept that for every rape reported, dozens go unreported. This would seem especially true of college campuses where not only are women highly encourage to report anything that might be rape, but where there is even a good likelihood that any woman making a claim will be substantially benefited (victims assistance money, counseling, grading “waivers”, etc.), and where there is no “stigma” to being a rape victim.
I am leaving SLW's comment up out of respect for him since our comments "crossed in the mail."
I deleted a comment from an anonymous reader who strayed from our mission and was intent on showing us how prevalent rape is. Since our mission is false rape claims and not baseball, wine, the Civil War, rape, the Indy 500, or anything else, I deleted it.
Yes LE is an "outsider" by Justice DEPT mandate.
"victims" fits see special trained nurses and victims advocates who coach them in advance of their LE interviews.
This is the only crime where LE steps back and lets civilians 'set the stage" while the cops play see no evil hear no evil monkey games.
So say that they are outsiders implies that they chose not to be:that is not the case.
I may add those trained womens advocates are funded by VAWA monies and have unique standing in a court of law where they can represent the victim while she remains silent.
This enables false prosecution greatly.
No other "advocate" has standing in a court of law.
(non officer of the court)
"Every Community Burned By a False Rape Scare Looks at Rape Claims With a Jaundiced Eye"
And I respectfully disagree.
If this statement were true, there would be nothing BUT "jaunticed eyes" on every college campus in America.
There are scores of people dedicated to insisting that satanic sex rings and day care rape fiends still exist. The state of California spent an astronomical amount of money on the McMartin preschool hoax, yet the state leads the nation STILL in child accusation witch hunts.
I WISH WISH WISH this statement were true...
but it just isn't.
Slwerner, it is of course true that feminists have traditionally portrayed police as being hostile and unsympathetic to women in regard to rape claims and other matters like DV.
But this is no different to the way feminists approach every other institution. For example, feminists claim that governments, legislatures and courts are male-dominated institutions that exist to perpetuate male power and privilege. And yet they rely almost exclusively on laws and policies enacted by these very same allegedly anti-woman institutions that give women an advantage (like affirmative action, VAWA, etc.) to get their way.
This is the game they play. That is, demand special protections and advantages from the very same institutions that you claim are irretrievably stacked against you. Their approach to the police is no different.
[part 1 of comment]
[part 2 of comment]
As the old saying goes 'the enemy of my enemy is not necessarily my friend. In the case of feminists and the police, it is more a case of 'the phony enemy of my enemy is sure as hell not my friend!'.
One of the first rules of successful communication and winning an argument is that you don't allow your opponents to 'frame' the issue or argue within their terms of reference. Saying that we shouldn't be too hard on the cops because they are really just another male-dominated authority battling feminism is to fall straight into the trap of picking sides based on a false mutual exclusivity created by the feminists. (Sadly, a lot of MRA circles make this mistake on many issues. Like the types who want to return to some imaginary golden era pre-feminism where men had the power. They conveniently forget that even back then, many men and boys were still treated like crap).
Indeed, it is a common tactic to control opinion by setting up phony debates and adversaries in order to distract from the real issue. A good example is the perpetual media discussion about career women versus stay-at-home moms. This is basically two sides of the same coin, an argument over how best to extort resources from men.
But ultimately, the fact that feminists have often adopted anti-police rhetoric is not really an argument for anything (unless one accepts feminist claims are anywhere close to reality, which I don't). It is more of a talking point, an interesting anecdote, but one that doesn't get us much closer to the true picture.
Nick S - ”As the old saying goes 'the enemy of my enemy is not necessarily my friend. In the case of feminists and the police, it is more a case of 'the phony enemy of my enemy is sure as hell not my friend!'.”
Nick,
I’m not trying to suggest that the police are “friendly” to men’s issues, especially FRA’s (although, I do believe the empirical evidence shows they are improving). My real issue is with S constantly trying to “frame” the entire issue of FRA’s as something that has been purposefully set up by LE so as to ”manufacture” statistics in order to get money.
Now, the practice of continually repeating a lie until it becomes accepted as truth has worked out quite well for feminists. But, this has been in no small part due to having had a willingly complicit press in their corner for 40+ years. Susan Brownmillers 2% canard is but one example of the press carrying the feminist’s water, and helping their repetitive lies take hold.
However, from the Men’s Rights/Men’s Issues side, we will have no such help from the press no even from the average citizen. Unlike the reception given to feminist-driven ideas, ours will be met with substantial skepticism.
I feel we must guard our credibility, as, increasingly, the world is watching us. I don’t believe that we should allow this blog to become polluted by nonsensical and unsubstantiated rants, based on notions that can be easily dispelled with a modicum of research.
The underlying truth that this side dispenses is not easy to attack, but the sites credibility might be an easier target. Should a significant number of posters here, for instance, begin to accept S’s bitter nonsense about police “cashing-in”, and subsequently begin using that notion in discussions as if it were and accepted truth (around here); it would provide a perfect “weak spot” to hit this sites credibility. It’s very easy to demonstrate that police cannot simply trade on their “statistics” in exchange for money (I’ve done it several times to try to show S the folly of his ways), so if someone/some organization found that they could not answer to the facts raised here straight-up, they could simply undermine the perceived credibility of those facts by showing that we believe in some utter nonsensical lies, arguing that this means we should not be believed about the “inconvenient” non-assailable facts either.
If we don’t challenge irrational “I believe it, therefore it MUST be true” non-intellectual nonsense ourselves, the risk is that it will spread, and attract more who will posit their own pet conspiracy theories – many of which will have little to do with the issue of FRA’s, but will instead try to take the focus off that main issue, and place it on to such side-issues peoples personal “issues” with police, etc.
"But ultimately, the fact that feminists have often adopted anti-police rhetoric is not really an argument for anything (unless one accepts feminist claims are anywhere close to reality, which I don't). It is more of a talking point, an interesting anecdote, but one that doesn't get us much closer to the true picture."
This is the truth. The anti-police rhetoric is the feminist equivalent of "If you loved me,you'd have sex with me....". "PROVE you don't support rape, give us money!".
Of course, that doesn't prove anything, except that they can get whatever they want through the fear men have of being branded "misogynists". That's all they WANTED to prove anyway.
Be careful,my friends. These things usually get worse before they get better. It will take about 50% of us being hit with a false rape claim before men will finally say enough is enough and refuse to bow to feminist pressure.
Videotape it every time you are alone with a woman,cover your ass legally, and when enough FRA's are out there, maybe people will realize that women really do lie about rape and it happens disgustingly often.
VAWA MUST BE REPEALED! It has given too many women the license to falsely accuse men boys of crimes they never committed and have the lives of these innocent human being ruined/destroyed!
Suffrage & Heinous Lies
Men are continually denigrated though men are by far the most in need of help for reasons painfully obvious, yet we still have old news depicting wimmin's suffrage.
How many university indoctrinated marxist feminists are protesting the deathly fascism in Egypt - notta, only men.
Men, lovers of freedom and a sane reality, are the resistance to tyranny not the cause. Psychotic, elites however are highly interested in agents of hatred and separation (feminist/manginas) to denigrate/imprison the resistance (Men) usually by statistical manufactured lies (1-in-4 violated before graduation!)
Wimmin are typically lazy, self-indulgent workers, buy tonnes of crap from 2/cent/day pink-collar slaves to power-suit into a slave-world only to strut by homeless men, and blame males for all the pain.
Go fuck yourselves fascist femmes - Oh you already do that by your amputated cybernetic penis - good to know you don't reduce men to their lowest function.
Post a Comment