Australian Senator Sarah Hanson-Young says she will settle defamation case for $75,000 against David Leyonhjelm for his 'stop shagging men' comment - He says 'She is wasting her time, money and endless reserves of outrage, because I won't be issuing an apology,'

5th_Law_of_Robotics · 2018-09-10T12:26:41+00:00

Women are just as strong and capable as men.

Also you can't call them out on their hypocrisy as you would with a man because she'll cry.

chadwickofwv · 2018-09-10T14:44:22+00:00

That man is a hero.

2018-09-10T14:01:20+00:00

It's only defamation if it's not true.

But she really is a cunt, you can prove it in the court of law no problem.

2018-09-10T18:07:27+00:00

Just to be clear, she is asking for him to settle the defamation case. To me, this is her saying, "I don't really have a case, so please give me money and a favorable verdict."

This looks to me like David's stance is really strong.

xNOM · 2018-09-10T19:37:47+00:00

Say what you want about this guy or Trump, but they figured out that apologizing to these offendatrons is 100% the wrong move.

azazelcrowley · 2018-09-10T20:56:22+00:00

She's suing over him calling her a hypocrite, and said its a slanderous accusation.

That's fucking crazy. That's the most ridiculous case I have ever heard of in this arena. Is she saying she is not at all a hypocrite?

She's a politician. I can guarantee, out of necessity, she is a hypocrite.

She's also a human being, presumably, so she is, in fact, a fucking hypocrite. Hypocrisy is something we do.

It's like if he said she is a liar and she hit the roof over it.

...

You've never told a lie?

It's also worth noting, she said "All men are rapists.", but is suing HIM, for saying she's a hypocrit. Which is more libelous?

I would think he could, and indeed should, along with others, sue her. Maybe a class action suit. We can gather up all the evidence that it impacts men for this kind of shit to be said about them, perhaps go with men struggling to enter childcare fields and so on, put on a parade of the teachers, and the babysitters, and so on, and see how fast she settles.

She's a politician, after all, it wouldn't look very good. The problem is, this is reliant on society making sense. She can come out and call every man a rapist and it's fine, because she's claimed she's the victim, and gynocentrism and feminist essentialism set the framing of the debate because of the institutional authority those lenses hold and the gatekeeping performed by the ideologically motivated chauvinists who ascribe to those lenses.

Here's the thing. What do you think tanked this persons reputation, saying all men are rapists, or the response to that? It's not exactly damage he caused her, if it's self-imposed.

Whose opinion of her, upon reading this story, was lowered by his statement? Nobodies.

It was low already for those with the conscience to care, and those without won't care about what he said. No damage, doesn't matter if it's true or not.

In fact, since the substance of her claim revolves around whether or not she is a hypocrit, we could, in fact, take note of the fact her statement that "All men are rapists" was said in an effort to combat sexism, and take note that this is plain hypocrisy of such an obvious extent and degree, that personally, i'd ask the jury to rule that her claim was obviously spurious and demand she pay compensation to David on that basis, effectively officially labeling her a hypocrit in the opinion of the court. You could make the case that such things are necessary to curb this kind of behavior in society.

thrway_1000 · 2018-09-10T19:51:52+00:00

Archive -- https://archive.is/zPJgP

omegaphallic · 2018-09-11T15:43:29+00:00

Is she really stupid enough to think she can win this frivolous case. For the sake of the Labour Party I hope she loses her next election, the left needs to trim the fools like this off, they are nothing but political ticks.

Comments