The Kavanaugh Smears Broke My Decades-Long Support For Feminism

[–]PapaGeorgio23 189 points190 points191 points 7 years ago (25 children) | Copy Link

[–]PeruvianRug 51 points52 points53 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheViolat0r 20 points21 points22 points 7 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]puppehplicity 5 points6 points7 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]grandmasbroach 4 points5 points6 points 7 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]awksomepenguin -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]MRA-automatron-2kb 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Rethgil 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Rethgil 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I've tried to avoid all this stuff, especially as a lifelong Democrat/Labour supporter-now I've finally checked out the FACTS, I am utterly appalled.

Utterly appalled by the Democrats feminist takeover, fake outrage, fake accusations of a person who was LITERALLY just a BOY during some of the claims (just 17 years old!!), yet that hasnt stopped them trying to smear him and hold him to account-and for WHAT??

For coming on to a girl when at a party and he wasnt even technically an adult?? And for THIS the female democrats made themselves and the party and feminism look like vile little babies.

The start of the hearings footage repulsed me-these women repeatedly speaking over the chairman, and trying to grab attention with spurious 'new evidence' that obviously wasnt solid enough to submit in time. Made me so angry.

For the record, Im not making up my own views. I am genuinely Left wing and have been for four decades-and today I am SICK of the way the Left has behaved and what they have become since Hilary, and in the UK, Corbyn and his feminist obsessions.

Feminism has poisoned the Left.

[–]penguinscollectcups 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]PM_ME_UR_PC_SPECS -41 points-40 points-39 points 7 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[–]Endless_Summer 20 points21 points22 points 7 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]PM_ME_UR_PC_SPECS -4 points-3 points-2 points 7 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Endless_Summer 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]genkernels 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]PM_ME_UR_PC_SPECS 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]genkernels 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]grandmasbroach 4 points5 points6 points 7 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]PM_ME_UR_PC_SPECS -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]grandmasbroach -2 points-1 points0 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]5th_Law_of_Robotics 8 points9 points10 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]not---a---bot 3 points4 points5 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]PM_ME_UR_PC_SPECS 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]5th_Law_of_Robotics 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]PM_ME_UR_PC_SPECS 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]tb21666 93 points94 points95 points 7 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link

[+]Guilvareux1 points 7 years ago* [recovered] (18 children) | Copy Link

I think some are even mentioning 4th wave.

[+]PM_ME_UR_PC_SPECS -22 points-21 points-20 points 7 years ago* (17 children) | Copy Link

[–]grandmasbroach 9 points10 points11 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

All waves of feminism have been delusional. Even going all the way back to getting the right to vote. Most women fought against it, not for it. They knew that there were these little things called responsibilities that you took on when you got said rights. That's why the voting age is 18. Not because you magically understand politics more once you turn that age. Rather, because that is when you could get drafted into war. Women were afraid if they took on the right to vote, they'd have to couple it with the responsibilities men of the time had when turning 18. Which were namely, the draft, and what was called bucket duty, aka mandatory fire fighting if a building near you caught on fire.

To recap, I think you need to read into the history on this subject a little more before you say something stupid. However, it might be too late for that judging by the fact your comment is hidden from down votes.

[–]genkernels 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]PM_ME_UR_PC_SPECS 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]genkernels 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]circlhat 4 points5 points6 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]PM_ME_UR_PC_SPECS 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]PowerToAnnihilate 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]PM_ME_UR_PC_SPECS 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]PowerToAnnihilate 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]PM_ME_UR_PC_SPECS 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]PowerToAnnihilate 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]PM_ME_UR_PC_SPECS 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]PowerToAnnihilate 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]5th_Law_of_Robotics 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]PM_ME_UR_PC_SPECS2 points 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]5th_Law_of_Robotics3 points 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]antilopes1 point 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]vagrantchemist 46 points47 points48 points 7 years ago* (59 children) | Copy Link

[–]JestyerAverageJoe 38 points39 points40 points 7 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]Baron-Kingsnorth 26 points27 points28 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]fuckeveryone________ 16 points17 points18 points 7 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]destronger 6 points7 points8 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]fuckeveryone________ 4 points5 points6 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ItGonBeK 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]JestyerAverageJoe 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]grandmasbroach 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]JestyerAverageJoe 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]grandmasbroach 13 points14 points15 points 7 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

Can we stop including the entire left in this discussion? There are plenty of people on the left, like me, who find identity politics to be just as reprehensible as you do. Can we just say, those who believe in identity politics? I understand that if someone is into identity politics, chances are they are on the left. But, that does not mean everyone on the left is like that. Some of us despise that shit. It's a big reason Hillary lost the election. Because a lot of the left doesn't get down with her identity politic playing bullshit. Personally, I did a spite vote for trump in hopes they learn their lesson not to try to pull that crap again. By the looks of it, it doesn't seem like they've learned that yet. I don't think the next presidential election is locked in like they think it is. I mean, I swear I remember last time they made assumptions like that it just didn't work out so well for them..

[–]kur1j 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

You sure you aren’t republican? ;) jk. The “far left” is what gets publicized though unfortunately. The screaming of everyone being hitler or fascists if they don’t conform to their ideology is what gets noticed. It gives “liberals” a bad name, just like the idiots running around screaming KKK shit giving republicans a bad name. Unfortunately, right now (or at least it seems to me) the ones making the most noise are extreme liberals on the left with screaming rape, screaming injustice for LGBT, screaming about feminism, screaming orange man bad, or just about every other topic, which seems to be more of them. The stupid KKK extreme right wingers only getting all pissy and covered when someone says they taking a monument away, which in the scheme of things is what i feel is smaller focal point then the extreme liberals complaining about literally everything. Sucks to be anywhere near the middle of either side.

[–]BlindGardener 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]maxcorrice 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]grandmasbroach 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]maxcorrice 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]grandmasbroach 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]maxcorrice 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]grandmasbroach 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]maxcorrice 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]grandmasbroach 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

We are doing that as a society, and it isn't working. Female happiness has been in sharp decline ever since they tried taking on the typically male position of breadwinner. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/07/the-chart-that-shows-how-feminism-is-ruining-womens-lives/

Again, I think the roles are not from a societal point. I think they are biological. Therefor, you'll never teach it or train it out of anyone. In essence, we are stuck with these roles as a by product of evolution. I don't see it changing for at least a couple hundred generations. I don't think you'll ever burn them to the ground as you claimed. Again, because it is encoded into our genetics, not a social phenomenon. So, it is stupid to even try to change. We would be better off embracing them. I'm not saying that all people are like this either. However, the majority of men are masculine, and the majority of women are feminine. Are there outliers who don't really fit? Absolutely. But, it is a very bad idea to listen to the minority, and then force the majority to adhere to their personal ideals.

[–]maxcorrice1 point 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]grandmasbroach0 points 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]maxcorrice1 point 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[+]mcg42ray -15 points-14 points-13 points 7 years ago (33 children) | Copy Link

[–]inkoDe 5 points6 points7 points 7 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[–]AdHomimeme 8 points9 points10 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]maxcorrice -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]mcg42ray -12 points-11 points-10 points 7 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]inkoDe 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]grandmasbroach 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

Just because liberals founded the US, does not mean that it can't be authoriterian... Besides, they were for the most part classic liberals. A far cry from a modern day progressive. I even identify more on the left than the right. But, to think that left wing politics is nothing but sunshine, rainbows, and free healthcare, you are just young and naive.

Left wing, just like right wing political systems, have killed millions of people. All one needs to do is look to the Soviet Union to see how a left wing dictatorship run on identity politics ends up.

Tell me who this sounds like. They started by dividing people up into different groups based on their identity and or social status. Instead of looking at people as individuals, their system only looked at your group identity. Sounding familiar yet?

Anyways, they ended up going after this group of people called the Kulaks. They were basically the upper middle class of the society and ran small farms. Since the Soviet Union had declared all wealth to be stolen from the workers/illegally obtained wealth, the Kulaks were more or less in possession of stolen goods. So, they needed to be punished. And again, these were far from millionaires or the top notch on the socio-economic ladder. They were farmers and store owners who did slightly better financially than their neighbors. But, jealousy is a hell of a thing. The Kulaks were eventually shipped to death camps, or dumped in the middle of Siberia.

The problems came quickly after the Kulaks were shipped away. Turns out, they were the most productive people in the Soviet Union. Shutting down all of their farms, or turning them over to the state ended horribly. Tens, if not hundreds of millions of Ukrainians died of starvation.

Ask a brainwashed college kid about why the Soviet Union didn't work, and they'll say a big part was all the famines that hit the Soviets. You mean like, the fucking famines they caused by, oh I don't know, killing off all the productive farmers? Those famines? This is far from the only time stuff like this happens because the left goes too far. An equal, and most say greater number of people, died similarly under Mao in the great leap forward. Both were left wing dictatorships, and both incidents caused the death of about a quarter of a BILLION with a B, people. The really fucked up part? This all happened in the last 80 years. Some of it in the last 50.

[–]mcg42ray -2 points-1 points0 points 7 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]grandmasbroach -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]mcg42ray 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]grandmasbroach 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]mcg42ray 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]grandmasbroach1 point 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ArchVileRespawned 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]spideyjiri -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]mcg42ray 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]spideyjiri -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Philarete 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]BlindGardener 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago* (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]Philarete 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Under which metric is Spain doing well? They're basically on the verge of an armed uprising!

Spain has been doing worse, though I haven't heard anything like an armed uprising. Catalan secession questions seemed to be mostly peaceful so far as I knew.

And by which metric is China doing poorly? They're becoming the defacto major Power in Africa.

China has done well economically recently, though it depends a bit on the metric chosen. Per capita it's not that great. GDP per capita is 108th. I'd point to its disastrous human rights record as being a better point about why China is not a desirable state to be in right now. I'd rather be in Spain than China, for example.

Also you forgot to include fascist Brazil which you may recall from the Olympics is not doing great.

You are right about Brazil. I'm not sure how it compares to its neighbors though. I don't know South America as well as I should.

[–]BlindGardener 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

Riot police were attacking poling stations in Spain last I heard, and declaration of kinda sorta martial law... Which catelonia is still operating under right now.

As for China and civil rights, well Japan has some civil rights issues too. Open government sanctioned bigotry against anyone with tattoos and foriegners especial ethnic Chinese and ethnic Korean, who often get treated like second class citizens even if born in Japan. It's legal to refuse them service.

It's a different set of civil rights issues than China, mind, where people get arrested for complaining xingping to Winnie the Pooh Bear on the internet. Really an apples to grapes comparison. But China's doing better at human rights than Belarus, NK or others.

East Germany and Ukraine are doing well, and were former Soviet satalites, as is Poland and Lithuania.

Frankly, right now a human rights lawyer in China is slightly more free than a Catalonia separatist lawyer in Spain. Though that's honestly subject to change.

[–]Philarete 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I can't find any source quickly on Catalonia.

I really don't think Japan and being treated as a second class citizen is at all comparable to what China is doing. Arrests and possible killings of religious minorities, widespread censorship, single party control. . . . Still better than NK (but who isn't?)

Poland has some issues (recent judicial crisis over separation of powers). Lithuania is doing fine from what I've read. East Germany has been reunited, so it's not really the same. Ukraine is doing okay, just unfortunately next to Russia which leads to problems.

I would note that Lithuania, Poland, and E. Germany were all arguably less communist than places where the revolution won more naturally. Poland, Lithuania, E. Germany were all conquests (either through war, or through Lithuania's "mutual assistance pact" which was more or less a preemptive surrender).

I looked up Ukraine, and its origin is a giant mess of civil war so I can't really categorize its communist origins cleanly.

Still, I think they are doing worse than the former fascist countries (for the most part).

[–]BlindGardener 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Philarete 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]mcg42ray -6 points-5 points-4 points 7 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]Philarete 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]mcg42ray 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Philarete -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]mcg42ray 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Philarete -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

That is true that they received economic support, so that is a reasonable counterargument. Although the communist bloc I think deserves a bit more credit for its economic power at its peak. Today, China and Vietnam are doing fairly well economically. However, the former fascist nations also have much better human rights records than their former communist counterparts. A simple "who are the good guys now" comparison between, say, Germany and Russia or Japan and the PRC pretty much favors the former fascists more or less across the board.

Or you could look at the Democracy Index to see which democracies are best functioning today. The highest former communist country I see is either Chile (if you count its very brief period) at 26th or Czech Republic (a former country forced to be communist) at 34th. Both behind Germany, Austria, Spain, Italy, and Japan.

Part of it is arguably timing, the fascist regimes are further in the past. Part of it could be length in power as the Comintern lasted longer than the Axis or Co-prosperity Sphere. (Although Franco's regime in Spain lasted much longer, and Spain only really became democratic in the 1970s.)

So no, I can't say for sure that it is better to get taken over by fascists. I am saying there is a lot of precedent for fascist regimes being destroyed and replaced so that within a generation or two things can return to rightness. It appears to take longer to fix former communist regimes, with those that resisted being fastest (e.g. Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, but notice even then that Hungary and Poland have serious struggles and are ranked in the low 50s on the Democracy Index). There is no end in sight either for some regimes like the PRC (literally putting ethnic minorities in concentration camps) or North Korea (torturing its own citizens a lot).

At no point am I arguing that fascism is good. Simply that if fascists come into power you hope they do what blind nationalism does - vastly overrate themselves and underrate others so that they dive into unwinnable wars and get removed from power when they lose. It's horribly ugly and not desirable at all. I just think it's better than the culture-crushing, individuality-destroying effects of radical left thinking.

While South Korea wasn't really fascist, I think it provides a great demonstration. North and South Korea were both totalitarian at one point. (Not sure where Koreans would draw the line, but 1960-1987 at a minimum). North Korea went for communism (which devolved into Juche) and the South went for military dictatorship that became (with great effort) a healthy democracy.

I'm open to counterarguments and examples. It's just an idea of thought about for a while so it may be entirely wrongheaded.

[–]mcg42ray 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]grandmasbroach -2 points-1 points0 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]mcg42ray 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]grandmasbroach -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]unhappytroll -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]romulusnr 124 points125 points126 points 7 years ago (187 children) | Copy Link

[–]amazonallie 12 points13 points14 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I am so confused about this hard no on Devil's Triangle as a drinking game.

In the late 80's/early 90's we played Bermuda Triangle.

It just meant if all the drinks left were isolated the board couldn't be reset.

My boarding school had tons of references that would never be found online in the meaning we had, but our yearbooks would be full of these references.

Like our PI Club, the Onion, roof smacking, roid rage.

Our definitions of things in our yearbook would make zero sense to anyone outside of our school.

Ps. None of above are anything nefarious.

Prep School culture, especially one with a boarding environment is so vastly different from public schools it is impossible to actually explain.

A ton of school slang came from, in our case, over 125 years of students.

I can guarantee urban dictionary would not have those things defined as we did.

[–]antilopes -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]bakedpotato486 41 points42 points43 points 7 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]cranktheguy 21 points22 points23 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]IngemarKenyatta 4 points5 points6 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]BlindGardener 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]romulusnr 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheAncientDude 100 points101 points102 points 7 years ago (80 children) | Copy Link

[–]oaky180 58 points59 points60 points 7 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]Paradoxthefox 12 points13 points14 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]MajorMalfunction71 3 points4 points5 points 7 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]cranktheguy 10 points11 points12 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]MajorMalfunction71 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]cranktheguy 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]whyoy 12 points13 points14 points 7 years ago (49 children) | Copy Link

[–]PKS_5 36 points37 points38 points 7 years ago (40 children) | Copy Link

[–]BlizzCo 10 points11 points12 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]Qwarked -15 points-14 points-13 points 7 years ago (37 children) | Copy Link

[–]zurrain 33 points34 points35 points 7 years ago (28 children) | Copy Link

[+]Qwarked -15 points-14 points-13 points 7 years ago (27 children) | Copy Link

[–]Endless_Summer 7 points8 points9 points 7 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

[–]amazonallie 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Endless_Summer 9 points10 points11 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]amazonallie1 point 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Qwarked -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–]Endless_Summer 9 points10 points11 points 7 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]Qwarked-3 points 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Endless_Summer3 points 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Qwarked0 points 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Endless_Summer1 point 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Qwarked-1 point 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]amazonallie2 points 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Qwarked0 points 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]amazonallie2 points 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

If you honestly believe that there wouldn't be one bit of gossip about an event that was supposed to take place regularly and over years involving that many people you are either the most naive person on the planet or you are so brainwashed about "toxic masculinity" and "rape culture" that you must be a first or second year University student.

Fun fact. If this type of behavior happened all the time it would absolutely have been common knowledge and would have been brought to light long ago. Especially in the '90's when the whole Clinton blowjob debaucle happened.

In case you missed it, Kavanaugh was pretty publically involved in all of that.

And yeah, it would have been brought to light very quickly then, if not by victims but by bystanders.

I was in my 20's when that was going on, and I can 100% assure you, the movement about harassment and assault back then makes this look like a back page story of a local newspaper.

And there was a valid reason for that.

Prior to that, women had almost no chance in having men charged.

In 1991, when I was raped, not woke up and regretted or was drunk so couldn't legally consent or gave in to pressure, actually raped, I tried to press charges.

In Ontario, men could use a woman's sexual history as a legal defense. As in she slept with other men, so she should have slept with me too.

In 1992 that law was overturned.

Sexual harassment was a vague definition in the majority of workplaces and if you think for one second anything short of actual sex, even then it was unlikely, was taken seriously you are in lala land.

When the whole Paula Jones, Monica Lewinsky, Clinton, et al hit the fan, things changed.

But your feminist hero Hillary was on the news DAILY rebuking any claim against her husband.

She HAD a chance to be a champion of women's rights but she accepted his behavior and tore those women to shreds. Even with proof!

Kavanaugh was smack dab in the middle of all of this. And women came out of the woodwork from everywhere calling all this behavior out.

There were offers of money for stories, not in the form of go fund me, but money paid from tabloids and TV tabloid shows for stories.

And yet here was a man in the middle of all this, who now is alleged to have been part of a roving group of rapists but nothing was said?

By Ford? By Ramirez? And especially by Swetnick.

At the time, what happened was absolutely needed in regards for women's rights.

And it lasted a good 5 years. It wasn't like our current 1 month new cycle.

It went on for years. Awareness was built, and women came out on the other side with actual sexual harassment policies, the inability of a defendent to use the victim's clothing or her sexual history or the fact she was drunk as a defense, the forensics used in rape exploded and the whole concept of date rape as opposed to stranger rape (and this was right after Paul Bernardo) was legitimized.

As a woman in my late teens, early 20's watching this, on the heels of my own date rape situation that had been downplayed and basically ignored by the OPP in Guelph, this movement was very personal.

I was disgusted that Hillary, in the middle of all these voices, victim blamed and victim shamed. And never once called Bill out for this behavior that had actual proof.

She had the chance as the First Lady to stand up and make a stance, not by necessarily divorcing him, but using her position to bring light to these issues. And she didn't. She proved to me in the middle of the 1990's that she was more interested in protecting her own power and playing politics than EVER speaking up for women or for what is right.

But back to Kavanaugh. He was in the middle of all this working with Kenneth Starr. And it wasn't like he was a tiny background figure.

And yet I am supposed to believe that out of all their social group, the kids of Washington insiders, not one of them would bring a drugging women, rape train up?

I mean his peer group was not exactly a group of high school kids in the middle of nowhere middle America.

These kids, had more ability to bring this to light than any other peer group in America, and yet not a hint, peep or whisper. Not a rumor. Not even a mention.

In the midst of the first, if not the largest, most important movement for women and rape and sexual harassment in History.

Really?

This dominated the news cycle for MONTHS. Everyone knew the players, yet we are supposed to believe that the most connected social group kept something that big 100% secret until now?

I realize fully understanding the context of what the 90's were like in regards to all of this is hard to imagine without living it, and yes chances are I may remember it more clearly than others because of my own rape happening at the time and it was very personal to me.

Ironically, last year, I was sexually assaulted (not penatrative rape) by a coworker.

I am a long haul driver now, which I absolutely love way more than teaching, what my 2 degrees are in.

He assaulted me in NY State, and proceeded to stalk me for 2 days into Quebec.

The next morning I called another female driver, who at the time I barely knew, and asked her if anyone had crossed the line with her.

She came from a business background, and immediately used her training to coax the story out of me.

She was on the phone with me when he turned up where I was.

We called a male colleague, and he met me that night at a 3rd truck stop and did not leave my side until the following morning when we left together.

Then I called and reported it to work. My 2 witnesses did not see the actual event, but backed me up on the events they were privy to.

The satellites on the truck backed up locations in my statement.

And since he should have left Quebec to go to Virginia on Sunday, but was still hanging out where my friend and I were on Monday, it was enough for his suspension while they investigated.

He was questioned by HR. His story had holes. He tried to claim I agreed to it, but here is where character comes into play.

It was a small company, and HR/Safety had known me for over 4 years at that point.

My coworkers backed up that I was not into casual flings, and if I were, this guy would have been the last man it would ever happen with.

In fact, when questioned, a couple of them burst out laughing at the thought of me allowing him near me.

His group of friends had also been responsible for spreading rumours that I was sleeping with boss and that is why I was given one of the first set of brand new trucks in.

We all had a good laugh at that one. I got one because I was the highest miler in the fleet and stayed out longer than anyone else.

Again. Character.

So when his tiny group tried to say things to help their buddy out, their stories were thrown out because their attempt to destroy my character did not match the consistency of my behavior.

So while I do believe Ramirez may have seen a penis at Yale and Dr. Ford may have been involved in a horrific situation, the player, Kavanaugh does not match the consistency of his character over his life.

I hope this makes it a little easier to understand why people are not so quick to believe and are not as supportive of your opinion in this.

I will be the first to admit, I have a terrible sense of humour. I curse like a sailor. I am not always "politically correct". I have gotten angry and lost my cool, I am human.

But none of these things make me more likely to allow the man who groped me to grope me.

Just like Kavanaugh being pissed off and not exactly the most, umm non combative in his testimony means he did something wrong.

And if every single guy who drank beer in high school automatically means they are rapists we have a huge problem in North America.

[–]Astromachine-6 points 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Endless_Summer2 points 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Astromachine0 points 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Endless_Summer0 points 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]666Evo 5 points6 points7 points 7 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]Qwarked 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]666Evo 4 points5 points6 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Qwarked0 points 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]666Evo5 points 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[+]Trujew1 points 7 years ago* [recovered] (3 children) | Copy Link

I don’t know what “evidence” you’re looking at, but when the FBI doesn’t talk to ~20 people to try and corroborate the allegations it’s hard to see the investigation as anything other than a sham.

[–]666Evo 7 points8 points9 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Trujew0 points 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]666Evo1 point 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]PKS_5 8 points9 points10 points 7 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Qwarked 5 points6 points7 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]PremiumBrandSaltines-1 point 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]2muchtequila -2 points-1 points0 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I feel like the accusation wasn't political, however, everything surrounding it including the way it was released and handled on both sides was.

Say you knew of a crime that was committed, you're a school teacher and a student told you a couple months ago their neighbor exposed and fondled themselves in front of the student and you're the only adult who knows. Would you tell the parents right away or would you wait two months until parent-teacher conferences so you can try to get bonus points for letting them know in person?

If you know something that could disqualify a potential supreme court justice on moral grounds say something as soon as you know it. Waiting until it was farther along to release the information screams of political scheming. If Feinstein released the information as soon as she acquired it, the Republicans would have most likely dumped Kavanaugh and gone with someone less likely to be held up on moral grounds.

Delaying the information made me feel like the Democratic leadership cared less about Ford and more about screwing over the Republicans. When both sides feel slimy, who do you root for?

[–]geminia999 -2 points-1 points0 points 7 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]I8ASaleen 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[+]shifu_shifu1 points 7 years ago* [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

He was on a list of 30 names and was basically picked ar random.

[–]I8ASaleen 5 points6 points7 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]whyoy -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

what would you have expected from someone falsely accused of being a rapist who's family had to sit there and watch him be degraded?

grammar aside, it isn't black and white he's been falsely accused. Any defense of him is contingent on proof of character assassination (emails, communications, social network analysis). I'd expect a judge who knows he is innocent to be just as vulnerable as he was about his father's calendar and stuff regarding other sexual encounters he's had and see if there was patterns in his sexual history.

I don't doubt it was self defense. I said it wasn't objective. Notice how he immediately invoked his defense as based on character assassination instead of bringing forth other witnesses for testimony regarding his drinking and partying? He goes straight for the weakness in male sympathies and makes it political. I highly doubt he will be politically impartial in that position of power and that doesn't make him guilty of rape, it makes him unfit for the position. The conservatives could choose any other candidate but are relying on majority margins to insist he's fine for the position.

In what way was the accusation 'unfair'??? She took a damn polygraph. How has her testimony been anything but objective? Dragged through the mud? This isn't just the mud of the #meToo movement.. (which we all support) it's the mud of his own drinking and belligerence that even his friends have described as problematic. It's not black and white my dude, even if I hope he didn't do it.

[–]Tickerbug 11 points12 points13 points 7 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]BoabHonker 5 points6 points7 points 7 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]itsthevoiceman -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]MahouShoujoLumiPnzr 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]BoabHonker 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]MahouShoujoLumiPnzr 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]whyoy -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

What, you mean supposedly knowing about the attempted rape accusation weeks before the hearings, but waiting until the most politically convenient moment to pull them out?

Absolutely. This is total bullshit. He was in positions of power long before this appointment. Although character assassination is all about timing in exactly this way... it's regretable that his composure broke down into childish blaming of others. He avoids talking about what his actual relationship is with Dr. Ford, which if he's confident he didn't do it... I'd expect him (my shitty neolib opinion) to just be clean about flirtation, sexual encounters he's had but to describe his innocence and not be flustered. Obviously a high-pressure situation where I have no ability to truly empathize so even if we ignore the things I just mentioned as seeming 'off'... I don't damn him for being a red-blooded American that partied and drank, and it is so far in the past I don't expect him to remember the details of that night. But even if he didn't do it, are we that pressed for talent? There are plenty of other candidates to use, so why don't we propose another conservative candidate and see if the smearing campaign continues? In this way, the conservatives are shooting themselves in the foot for this one guy and that just makes no damn sense other than the midterms. If dems are guilty of character assassination here, the conservatives are just as guilty of partisanship by insisting that he is beyond reproach here.

EDIT: Also, gaslighting and victim blaming are synonymous and I was just using rhetoric.. not victim(? Brett K?) blaming. And even it is is politicallty advantageous for dems to smear Brett K.. a) it's a personal issue between the two of them where it is clear it's a grey area, not black and white b) any defense of Brett K is conditioned on the odds that Ford is lying. It's not a 50/50 split in probability between pure character assassination and rape charges. I'd go with my gut say that we're not that talent starved (use another candidate) and further: rape is worse than character assassination. Any discussion here about men's rights and character assassination that is objective should be driven by other examples of character assassination towards men for similar behavior, not a black and white argument where he's simultaneously a rapist and a victim of character assassination. That's just not thinking clearly. I will say that a lot of the outrage here is just driven by other events in the media surrounding rape culture.

[+]Ballistrophobia1 points 7 years ago [recovered] (4 children) | Copy Link

Nothing, not a peep, until it became politically advantageous to slander his character

Uhhh, what? Dr. Ford first reported being assaulted by Kavanaugh in 2012...

[–]TheAncientDude 4 points5 points6 points 7 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[+]PremiumBrandSaltines1 points 7 years ago [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

She didnt even name him to the therapist.

[–]TheAncientDude 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]UnkindFellow -10 points-9 points-8 points 7 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]TeaTimeNinja 14 points15 points16 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]achammer23 11 points12 points13 points 7 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]a_fuckin_samsquanch 10 points11 points12 points 7 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]achammer23 5 points6 points7 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]_pulsar 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]antilopes -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

You should run for president, you sound just like Trump.

Because she was 15 and at a pre-party with drunken older boys and had drunk alcohol, so she likely lied about where she was, just for one thing.

Do you really think it is normal for a 15 year old sexually assaulted by dual sport star and (self proclaimed) brilliant scholar from a super posh school to go to police?

To make it easier let's pretend she hadn't been drinking, wasn't at a drunken party, and hadn't lied about her plans or whereabouts.

Easier still, let's pretend it is 2018 not 1986.

Still too hard? OK, let's pretend she wasn't from a social class and at a school where it is considered unwise to be in the company of a boy without another girl as a witness, because of the risk the boy will raise his status by claiming some intimacy, and that will trash her status. This gives a good picture of her environment.
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2018/09/holton-arms-alumnae-ford-accusations-kavanaugh

Should she have gone to the police, now that we have made it enormously easier? You might think so, but reality is not on your side. That is not, in fact, what sexually assaulted 15yo girls do. Especially not smart ones like Blasey-Ford.

In fact even the stupid girls seldom report sexual assaults to police. They might not know the capital city of England but they know what happens to girls who speak up about sexual assault.

[–]_pulsar 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]antilopes -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

Why would she go to police? She didn't want to go public for the confirmation, let alone go through a trial. That is assuming she would want him convicted, which can't be assumed.
Anyway she hasn't got anything a prosecutor could take to court.

The only possibility would be if Kav or Mark Judge had told other people at the time, and they were prepared to:

Talk to police voluntarily.
Tell the truth to police confidentially. (Breaking the code Kav had reminded everybody of in public statements in recent months: "what happens at school stays at school").
Appear in court in front of the whole world and make their statement, permanently making themselves a target for hatred by most of the people they will be asking to hire them in future, and losing half their friends, incurring security costs and putting their family and self at risk.

[–]NCahayla -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]a_fuckin_samsquanch 4 points5 points6 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]deetar 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]leftajar 7 points8 points9 points 7 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]BoabHonker -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Trunk-Monkey 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]BoabHonker -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Trunk-Monkey 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]grandmasbroach -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]MillennialDan -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]maxcorrice 14 points15 points16 points 7 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]romulusnr -2 points-1 points0 points 7 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]maxcorrice 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]romulusnr 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]maxcorrice 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]romulusnr -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]maxcorrice 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]romulusnr -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]maxcorrice 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Reddit1990 26 points27 points28 points 7 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]grandmasbroach 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Reddit1990 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]cranktheguy 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Reddit1990 13 points14 points15 points 7 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

From the article:

The overarching accusation is that Kavanaugh whitewashed his record... Democrats have not gone so far as to accuse Kavanaugh of perjury

And at the end:

Even though Leahy is careful to say Kavanaugh “might have” misled the Senate, he’s still throwing red meat out without much to back him up, and he gets Three Pinocchios for this one.

Did you even fucking read it? Did you watch the hearing? Not even the democrats are saying he's lied, you are just brainwashed by the media hype. The whole thing has been a circus that should have been done behind closed doors and dismissed quietly. Instead it turned into an incredibly emotional event for everyone.

I highly recommend you read the article I posted about his record as a judge. Might learn a thing or two about this whole thing.

[–]TheAncientDude 3 points4 points5 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheAncientDude 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Saucebiz 9 points10 points11 points 7 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheAncientDude 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]tuzimaster007 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

It's not the drinking in high school - it's the fact he lied through his teeth and perjured himself several times throughout the hearings. If some one asks you - did you drink in high school, and like any normal person you reply - "yea so what" - that's perfectly fine. It's the hiding and lying that disqualifies him.

Women don't talk to therapists for decades about an event in order to set up ruining a guy 30 years down the road. Look at all the death threats and shit she's had to deal with - while he was a Federal judge it was easier to just ignore him. Put yourself in her shoes - she was very likely assaulted, and knew she was going to her name dragged through the mud and back. She only exposed herself to this shit because the literal honor of our highest court was on the line. (And it's a total joke now).

Gorsuch flew through without any sort of drama. There *had* to be a better Federalist candidates they could have chosen. The only reason he was chosen was in order to decide on an upcoming case that makes the administration free from persecution after a pardon. This was a job interview, not a court case. If you were a hiring manager - and you had two equal candidates, one of which has several corroborating reports of sexual assault - why do you pick the one with the reports?

[–]PremiumBrandSaltines6 points 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]LinkandShiek 4 points5 points6 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheAncientDude 3 points4 points5 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]MezzaCorux 4 points5 points6 points 7 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]romulusnr 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]antilopes -2 points-1 points0 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]MezzaCorux 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]antilopes 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]feared_rear_admiral 3 points4 points5 points 7 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]romulusnr 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]feared_rear_admiral 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]romulusnr 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]feared_rear_admiral -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]romulusnr 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]feared_rear_admiral 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]romulusnr 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

No. He was chosen by the President to be a new judge on the US Supreme Court which is the final say on legal decisions. The upper house of the US legislature (the Senate) has to agree to let him on. In order to assess whether or not he should be accepted, a subset of the Senate forms a committee and holds hearings into the issue, usually involving asking the nominee questions. Those hearings are where Mrs. Ford told her story, as well as where Mr. Kavanaugh had his public emotional breakdown in response. (After the committee decides to end the hearings, the committee votes on a recommendation, and then the whole Senate votes on the nominee.)

There was no judge, no jury, no witness testimony (outside of documents submitted to the committee by its members), no prosecutor, no criminal investigation, no summonses, and more importantly, no standard of evidence or rules of judicial proceedings.

Yes, lying to Congress is a crime the same way lying to a judge or jury is a crime, but that's not because a congressional hearing is a court trial.

Surely it must have been a huge coincidence that the lady decided to file it right then as the president decided to run the guy in the supreme court.

I don't know if that would be Mrs. Ford's fault, or the fault of the members on the committee who were predisposed against Mr. Kavanaugh. I don't know who else Mrs. Ford has ever mentioned this to. I also don't know if she's avoided talking about it for these decades because of how traumatic it was for her and she didn't want to remember or relive it, nor do I know what encouragement she needed to come forth, and if that encouragement was greater at the time Mr. Kavanaugh was about to become a Supreme Court judge compared to when he was becoming a circuit court judge, or anything else he's been hired for. I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that it probably would be. Certainly the scrutiny of Mr. Trump was much greater when he was about to become President of the United States than it was when he was about to host a reality TV show. Same for his opponent.

Do tell though how any of that would play out against a guy who is not a high profile rich guy who is also a hot shot legal professional.

Well, even a hot shot legal professional would not be representing himself in a legal trial. He'd have a defense attorney, probably a big raft of them. When testifying he would not be prattling on about his weight lifting or his calendar or his love of beer, but would be limited to specific answers to specific questions asked by either his own attorney or the prosecuting attorney.

I will concede though that your point that he'd probably still come out pretty well, given the general track record of rich white people in court systems in this country, is well made. But, that sad reality doesn't really, to me, equate to factual innocence, in fact quite the opposite, and people on both sides of the proverbial aisle will typically agree that wealth and status makes you more likely to get away with crime.

[–]IngemarKenyatta 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]PremiumBrandSaltines1 point 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]dellsharpie 3 points4 points5 points 7 years ago (47 children) | Copy Link

[–]GreyStomp 27 points28 points29 points 7 years ago (41 children) | Copy Link

[–]Nahte27 25 points26 points27 points 7 years ago (27 children) | Copy Link

[–]Leroyjankins8989 37 points38 points39 points 7 years ago (24 children) | Copy Link

[–]MittenMagick15 points 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[+]UnkindFellow -10 points-9 points-8 points 7 years ago (22 children) | Copy Link

[–]zurrain 9 points10 points11 points 7 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]UnkindFellow -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

He is a constitutionalist but when 2500 law professors determine that he acted in a partial manner quite frankly I trust their opinion on the subject more than mine or yours. They are the most qualified to make a determination of his impartiality.

I don't see 2500 law professors signing a petition that he deserves the position do you?

Here's what they said:

regardless of his guilt or innocence in multiple allegations of sexual assault, his response to the Senate inquiry was so inappropriate and unbecoming a judge as to be disqualifying. "The question at issue was of course painful for anyone," reads the letter. "But Judge Kavanaugh exhibited a lack of commitment to judicious inquiry. Instead of being open to the necessary search for accuracy, Judge Kavanaugh was repeatedly aggressive with questioners. Even in his prepared remarks, Judge Kavanaugh described the hearing as partisan, referring to it as 'a calculated and orchestrated political hit,' rather than acknowledging the need for the Senate, faced with new information, to try to understand what had transpired. Instead of trying to sort out with reason and care the allegations that were raised, Judge Kavanaugh responded in an intemperate, inflammatory and partial manner, as he interrupted and, at times, was discourteous to senators."

[+]Justathrowawayoh1 points 7 years ago* [recovered] (3 children) | Copy Link

Let me yawn a little harder. I know some of the professors on that least, at least 3 of them from my law school signed the petition. Calling them "partisan" would be an understatement.

You want to know why you should know it's partisan? Because SCOTUS justices have said partisan things in the past (as recently as 2016) and you didn't see any of these people so concerned with partisan behavior.

[–]UnkindFellow 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]zurrain1 point 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Leroyjankins8989 5 points6 points7 points 7 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]UnkindFellow -3 points-2 points-1 points 7 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]Leroyjankins8989 6 points7 points8 points 7 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]UnkindFellow 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

Listen I'm nor a lawyer or a judge, or in any position to determine how a Justice should react to allegations like those. But if nearly 2500 professors of law determine that his reaction was unfit for one, that's not a calculated political hit. I know when I'm out of my depth and when to trust the experts and quite frankly I trust the law professors opinion on what's acceptable more than yours.

Here's what they said:

regardless of his guilt or innocence in multiple allegations of sexual assault, his response to the Senate inquiry was so inappropriate and unbecoming a judge as to be disqualifying. "The question at issue was of course painful for anyone," reads the letter. "But Judge Kavanaugh exhibited a lack of commitment to judicious inquiry. Instead of being open to the necessary search for accuracy, Judge Kavanaugh was repeatedly aggressive with questioners. Even in his prepared remarks, Judge Kavanaugh described the hearing as partisan, referring to it as 'a calculated and orchestrated political hit,' rather than acknowledging the need for the Senate, faced with new information, to try to understand what had transpired. Instead of trying to sort out with reason and care the allegations that were raised, Judge Kavanaugh responded in an intemperate, inflammatory and partial manner, as he interrupted and, at times, was discourteous to senators."

[–]Leroyjankins89892 points 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]UnkindFellow1 point 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Leroyjankins89891 point 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]circlhat 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]amazonallie 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]UnkindFellow 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]amazonallie 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]TeaTimeNinja 4 points5 points6 points 7 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]I8ASaleen 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]dellsharpie 11 points12 points13 points 7 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

His dissenting opinion on net neutrality: https://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/06F8BFD079A89E13852581130053C3F8/$file/15-1063-1673357.pdf

His consistent efforts to rescind or to weaken the separation of church and state are massive starting points. http://www.aei.org/publication/from-the-bench-the-constitutional-statesmanship-of-chief-justice-william-rehnquist/

I'm not a fan of his stance on birth control and abortion either: https://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/425C0AE29F10AFD785257E4B00767BF5/$file/13-5368.pdf Regardless of whatever your opinion of abortion is - any step to control or limit birth control is bad for everyone - as a man I look forward to future birth control options - even people of a religious background should have the choice of birth control.

I do like his stance on his opposition to affirmative action: http://go.politicoemail.com/?qs=8a6fc54911f1bc256aabda52abb01b7f565332137ad6cb97a0dd398b667cd6733e830d48b37f41c22a5bc95873bb668a This effort was passed and rightly so.

His religious bias is what worries me the most - SCOTUS Judges need till be impartial and I worry he will not be.

Good enough?

[–]amazonallie 6 points7 points8 points 7 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]dellsharpie 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]amazonallie 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]PremiumBrandSaltines1 point 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]SuperUltraJesus 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[+]Ballistrophobia1 points 7 years ago [recovered] (4 children) | Copy Link

Giving misleading answers under oath, for one.

Setting EVERYTHING else aside, Kavanaugh's performance during the Judiciary Committee alone should have disqualified him from the position. He demonstrated that he was unable to keep his emotions in check or put country before party.

He certainly may not have assaulted Dr. Ford. There's a good chance that we won't learn the whole truth about what may or may not have happened to Dr. Ford. But one thing these "smears" did reveal during his testimony is that Brett Kavanaugh is not fit to be a Supreme Court Justice....

[+]Justathrowawayoh1 points 7 years ago* [recovered] (3 children) | Copy Link

Nah, he responded reasonably for a person who was being accused of disgusting vile conduct by national politicians and being on blast for weeks by the nation's media. He spoke the truth about the partisan hackery.

[+]Ballistrophobia1 points 7 years ago [recovered] (2 children) | Copy Link

Nah, he didn't respond reasonably for a Supreme Court nominee in any situation.

He spoke the truth about the partisan hackery.

Complete agree there. Kavanaugh admitted to being a partisan hack during the committee:

"This whole two-week effort has been a calculated and orchestrated political hit fueled with apparent pent-up anger about President Trump and the 2016 election, fear that has been unfairly stoked about my judicial record, revenge on behalf of the Clintons and millions of dollars in money from outside left-wing opposition groups,"

He thinks he's a victim of revenge on behalf of the Clinton's...

Any level of Judge should be more impartial than this, but ESPECIALLY a SCOTUS nominee.

[+]Justathrowawayoh1 points 7 years ago* [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

Nah, he was fine. I think the only thing which went too far was when he started responded to questions with essentially, " How about you!?"

People who say this make me think they've never actually interacted with let alone appeared before federal judges.

[–]DBOLinouttacontrol 10 points11 points12 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Nahte27 17 points18 points19 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]anothervapefag 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Preform_Perform 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]Wisemanner -19 points-18 points-17 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Sketchy_Uncle -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]JamesGollinger 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]anothervapefag 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]AllMyJokesArgon -4 points-3 points-2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Lupinfujiko 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]XteveMcQueen -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]romulusnr 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I can't honestly decide if I think a good man, an innocent man, especially one with a career as a judge, would act with the sort of rabid-dog reaction that BK did. He makes Clarence Thomas' reaction to his own (not dissimilar) experience look calm and reasonable in comparison.

What was Merrick Garland's reaction to being royally shafted for months? Ranting and raving and threatening to rain fire down on his enemies?

Yes, I do think BK didst protest too much, as the saying goes.

No one is entitled to a Supreme Court seat. If Congress doesn't like his tie, they can vote against a nominee's confirmation. BK didn't act like someone grateful for the very thought of being given the chance. He acted like someone who believed that the only right and just outcome was to be confirmed without delay.

If there's a silver lining here, it's that his SC dissents are going to be entertaining reading, if his behavior in Senate committee hearings is any indication.

[–]MistaMayfair 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]romulusnr 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Crusader_1096_2 -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]romulusnr 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]pmatus3 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]planned_serendipity1 5 points6 points7 points 7 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[+]PM_ME_UR_PC_SPECS -13 points-12 points-11 points 7 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]5th_Law_of_Robotics 9 points10 points11 points 7 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]PM_ME_UR_PC_SPECS -4 points-3 points-2 points 7 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]5th_Law_of_Robotics 6 points7 points8 points 7 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]PM_ME_UR_PC_SPECS -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]5th_Law_of_Robotics 5 points6 points7 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]PM_ME_UR_PC_SPECS 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]5th_Law_of_Robotics 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]BisquitBill 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]PM_ME_UR_PC_SPECS 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]XteveMcQueen 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Maelshevek -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

This was basically my position until I Googled “why is my wife so lazy?” There were practically no articles on the issue. I found TRP, and realized how current feminist theory has given women moral license to behave poorly. It also showed me that as a man, it’s my calling to lead, that equity only exists if people contribute equally. It also showed that it was past time for me to stand up for what I knew was right. I had to be an assertive and confident in what was true and good. It also points out how, frankly, men are born to lead. There are real differences between the sexes, and we can’t just be expected to act exactly the same way if we aren’t exactly the same, lol.

This nearly ended out marriage, as I started setting expectations and not putting up with lies or excuses any more. God it sucked. Nothing is worse than martial stress, or God forbid, that you should feel like you have to parent your spouse. But my therapist agreed that I was making the right decisions, and even my new therapist, a woman, agrees (because she follows logic and not ideology). Confirmation that I was doing the right thing was very helpful.

Now things are turning around, and I still have issues trusting her, but that’s to be expected. Trust has to be earned.

Ultimately, I have come to understand a number of things: there is no truth without verification, lead based on what is true, stand up for what is true, pursue what is good even when people are against you, and never give up on goodness—it always pays off. And if my marriage had ended, I would still feel the same way, because I knew what I wanted in a woman, that it was good, and that I was confident that such a person could be found.

And these truths apply to women equally. So in this, I could be calling a “feminist”—that women must be just as morally responsible as men are, that if they want to lead or have a say in anything, it has to be based on what is good and just.

[–]PM_ME_UR_PC_SPECS 6 points7 points8 points 7 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[+]circlhat -7 points-6 points-5 points 7 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]feared_rear_admiral 8 points9 points10 points 7 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]Daemonicus -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]grandmasbroach 4 points5 points6 points 7 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]Daemonicus 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]grandmasbroach 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]Daemonicus 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]grandmasbroach 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]Daemonicus1 point 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]grandmasbroach1 point 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Daemonicus2 points 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]grandmasbroach1 point 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Daemonicus2 points 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]thrway_1000 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]angelicnargles 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]DavidByron2 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]mcg42ray -10 points-9 points-8 points 7 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]Azure_Triedge 9 points10 points11 points 7 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[+]mcg42ray -10 points-9 points-8 points 7 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]DraqonBourne 15 points16 points17 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[+]Vaginalpuppetry1 points 7 years ago [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

OMG. HOW DARE YOU DEFEND YOURSELF FROM OUT FAKE RAPE ALLEGATIONS.

I guess the correct thing to do for any good boy would be send over and take it in the ass for brave women everywhere. Give me a break.

[–]Azure_Triedge 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]chocoboat 5 points6 points7 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]Vaginalpuppetry1 points 7 years ago [recovered] (4 children) | Copy Link

Leahy's claim is completely baseless.

[–]mcg42ray 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[+]Vaginalpuppetry1 points 7 years ago [recovered] (2 children) | Copy Link

Filed during the confirmation fiasco not relating to his conduct as a sitting judge. Roberts passed the complaints along to the 10th Circuit after they were referred to him. Doesn't mean a whole lot.

[–]mcg42ray 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Lupinfujiko 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]mcg42ray 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Lupinfujiko 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheAncientDude 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]EricAllonde[S] 5 points6 points7 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]TheAncientDude 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]tacklebox -53 points-52 points-51 points 7 years ago (52 children) | Copy Link

[–]Trunk-Monkey 24 points25 points26 points 7 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

It would seem to me that the article actually assumes that the reader is familiar with the testimony, and the hearings in general.

the recent attempt by all the usual suspects to block Kavanaugh’s confirmation to the U.S. Supreme Court at the eleventh hour by destroying his character, reputation, and life, via salacious, unsubstantiated, and uncorroborated allegations of sexual misconduct dating back thirty-odd years to when he was but a teenager

It was an 'eleventh hour' accusation. Feinstein withheld the letter from Ford for how long before bringing it up? And Fords accusations were, in fact, not supported by evidence or by anyone she named as a witness., which makes the accusations both unsubstantiated and uncorroborated. So where's the assumption that the reader didn't watch her testimony?

You should also note that the FBI investigation was not obstructed… the FBI simply lacks jurisdiction to investigate unless specifically requested by the White House, or if there is a violation of federal law. Fords allegation didn't involve a federal crime. Any meaningful investigation would have had to come from the Montgomery County police, that didn't happen because Ford never filed a complaint with them…

It also seems that you're the one who assumes people are unfamiliar with the case.

[–]NCahayla 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]tacklebox -21 points-20 points-19 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]functionalsociopathy 15 points16 points17 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Trunk-Monkey 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ThatEconGuy 32 points33 points34 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]PapaGeorgio23 6 points7 points8 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]McFeely_Smackup 14 points15 points16 points 7 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]tacklebox 14 points15 points16 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]_Mellex_ -4 points-3 points-2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]romulusnr -30 points-29 points-28 points 7 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]bufedad 28 points29 points30 points 7 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Benito_Mussolini 25 points26 points27 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]romulusnr 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]bufedad 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Leroyjankins8989 8 points9 points10 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]tacklebox 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Leroyjankins8989 -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]chadwickofwv 11 points12 points13 points 7 years ago (20 children) | Copy Link

[–]romulusnr 10 points11 points12 points 7 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[+]philjones851 points 7 years ago [recovered] (4 children) | Copy Link

to me, it doesn't matter if she's believable. every halfway decent actress should be able to give a "believable" performance. there are lots of people that could be convincing, there are lots of people that are willing to lie. on a venn diagram, there will be overlap between those two circles (there will also be overlap between "believable" and "true b/c he raped her"). the problem is, we can't know. that's why we need actual evidence. if you want any semblance of fairness, we just have to have it...

[–]romulusnr 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[+]philjones851 points 7 years ago [recovered] (2 children) | Copy Link

As a high school boy, I wrote much worse. The bravado and posturing done in high school is not realistic. These are not adults. They don't understand how ridiculous the shit they're saying is. They're really just learning to talk/communicate. I think there's a decent chance that he is lying about what the devil's triangle meant, but there's also a chance that it was a drinking game. Regardless, pulling up shit from high school proves that nothing he said is going to satisfy the people that want to get him "at any cost". That being said, if it wasn't a drinking game and he remembers that and lied under oath, that's really serious. Should it disqualify him from his post? Maybe. That position requires ridiculously high standards. It has massive control over the country. If that's the standard that we're holding public figures up to, then we should hold up the politicians combing high school yearbooks for anything they can use to get their way. That's not how they should represent the country either. Bottom line, the whole thing is a mess. There's no clear right vs wrong for either side.

[–]romulusnr 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]foot_kisser 22 points23 points24 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

She says she was pushed into a room, the door was locked behind her, she was pushed onto a bed, things happened, then she got free of them. At this point, she was scared, the bedroom represented fear, and the bathroom across the hall represented safety. She does not describe how she solved the problem of the locked door between fear and safety.

Then she says she left the party, and doesn't remember how she got home. She doesn't remember the exact location, but the distance from her home to the approximate location is about 6 miles. If she'd walked, she'd vividly remember the very long walk. She says she didn't drive, or have her license yet. She didn't go back to the party to catch a ride, or she'd remember it. She wouldn't have had a cell phone, since it was 1982. She didn't get a ride from her parents, as she'd been drinking and wanted to hide that from her parents. If she got a ride home from a woman, she'd remember feeling safer around her. If she got a ride from a man or a boy, she'd either be terrified of him being just like the boys she was escaping from, or she'd trust him and he'd be her hero, strong emotions that would make it very memorable.

There's every reason for her to remember how she escaped the locked room or how she managed to get home after being traumatized. There's no particular reason for her to remember exactly how many beers she had at a party 36 years ago.

She talked about giving a reporter information from her therapist's notes. This information was private in the extreme, and it was given to a reporter who could tell everyone in the nation everything he received from her. This happened about 2 weeks before the hearing. When asked about whether she gave the reporter her entire set of therapist notes or not, she claimed that she could not remember this important information affecting her privacy from 2 weeks ago.

[–]romulusnr 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]DevilishRogue 8 points9 points10 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]bufedad 5 points6 points7 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]leftajar -3 points-2 points-1 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]alc0 4 points5 points6 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]tacklebox -25 points-24 points-23 points 7 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]ignigenaquintus 14 points15 points16 points 7 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[+]tacklebox -11 points-10 points-9 points 7 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]ignigenaquintus 10 points11 points12 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[+]tacklebox -8 points-7 points-6 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]ignigenaquintus 11 points12 points13 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]amazonallie 4 points5 points6 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]tacklebox -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]kindofageek 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]tacklebox 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]kindofageek 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Lupinfujiko 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]zurrain -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheKingOfPancake 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]LocalMadman -13 points-12 points-11 points 7 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]tacklebox 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]BoabHonker -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]LocalMadman 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]MRA-automatron-2kb -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]MiddleAgedMGTOW -3 points-2 points-1 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]cyruszane -2 points-1 points0 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]BlindGardener -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]Cragnous -46 points-45 points-44 points 7 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]grandmasbroach 9 points10 points11 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]PowerToAnnihilate 13 points14 points15 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]kindofageek5 points 7 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]itsauser667 3 points4 points5 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Azure_Triedge 24 points25 points26 points 7 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[+]esantipapa1 points 7 years ago [recovered] (2 children) | Copy Link

Probably best you don't use "we" given your stance on stereotypes.

[–]Azure_Triedge -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]KnightofNarg 4 points5 points6 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]lonewolfhistory -2 points-1 points0 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]brant29221 points 7 years ago [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

Kavanaugh: Way of the Virgin Chad... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ktme4Oj2-zs

The Kavanaugh Smears Broke My Decades-Long Support For Feminism

Comments

metoo is kind of a mix between 3rd and 4th.

Title	The Kavanaugh Smears Broke My Decades-Long Support For Feminism
Author	EricAllonde
Upvotes	618
Comments	391
Date	October 12, 2018 2:12 PM UTC (7 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/9nklzv/the_kavanaugh_smears_broke_my_decadeslong_support/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/the-kavanaugh-smears-broke-my-decades-long-support.892075 https://theredarchive.com/post/892075