Feminists are Choking on The Red Pill Movie

feedmecarrots · 2016-10-27T18:33:33+00:00

I would like to see it. I imagine that all the fuss will attract some people to see it that would not have otherwise.

eyesonmyback · 2016-10-29T04:35:18+00:00

would someone who's seen the film please confirm or deny the part about Eli's genital mutilation?

TibsKirk · 2016-10-28T02:47:49+00:00

I am confused that this post says 11 comments but only contains 2.

Karissa36 · 2016-10-27T15:36:28+00:00

Irrelevant evidence is excluded in all criminal trials. Rape shield laws are not some incredibly unique due process violation.

Someone on trial for bank robbery does not get to offer evidence that the bank teller witness had a previous DUI. It's possible that the witness's prior DUI might suggest that he might have been drinking the day of the bank robbery and that might have affected his ability to properly perceive and remember. The law won't allow that kind of defense evidence because it is too remote to be relevant and primarily designed to harass and malign the witness.

In the same way, rape shield laws prevent defendants from introducing evidence of victims’ previous sexual behavior, history, or reputation unless they can prove it is directly relevant to the alleged rape. (For example, the alleged victim's previous consensual sexual activity with the alleged rapist is admissible.) Lawmakers recognized that the character, morality, and sexual history of a victim are largely irrelevant to a sex crime trial. The rape shield laws they enacted essentially apply the usual rules of evidence: Evidence that isn’t reasonably related to the charges and that amounts merely to character evidence won’t come in at trial.

You can no more defend a rape case by calling the alleged victim a slut than you can defend a bank robbery case by calling the teller witness a drunk. (Unless you have some proof the witness was drunk during the robbery. Then it would be relevant. A prior DUI conviction would not be relevant.) Conversely, you can't prosecute a bank robbery case by proving the defendant has previously been convicted of bank robbery 3 times. The prosecutor has to prove the defendant robbed a bank this time.

The fact that an alleged bank robber was previously convicted of bank robbery 3 times is one thousand times more relevant than what other man an alleged rape victim had sex with 3 weeks before the alleged crime. Both of these pieces of evidence will be excluded because the trial is about what happened this time. Not about character evidence.

We could have a reasoned debate about whether excluding character evidence in criminal trials is appropriate for the rules of evidence. Most of the time this rule adheres to the benefit of the criminal defendant, making the trial about whether this particular crime was committed, and not about a morality play on his whole life. It also adheres to the benefit of witnesses who can testify without having their privacy invaded and their whole life put up to be judged just because they witnessed a crime.

What we can't have a reasoned debate about is why, out of the entire body of law excluding what is merely character evidence in ALL criminal trials, Paul Elam only encourages jury nullification for rape trials. Hint: It's not because he is concerned about due process.

FiercelyFires · 2016-10-28T01:05:06+00:00

I've seen the movie 3 times now, and I honestly have to say it's one of the fines pieces of jurnalisem I've seen. Just look at him. i see this man and i wanna be him. he is at once one of the greatest victims of women (full circumcision at birth(removal), AND domestic/sexual abuse) but he is a hero to me. In te movie he describes the ILLUSION. Contrary to popular science WE ARE NOT miserable being immersed in rigid gender roles. We're sad b/c there should have only been ONE SEX. It happens in nature in some species. Then guys (men) fill all gender roles imaginable! Imagine: if theyre were no women, men could do all theyre stuff too, and better/faster. *edit: would men make up fake "rape" stories? answer: no.

Title	Feminists are Choking on The Red Pill Movie
Author	scanspeak
Upvotes	118
Comments	26
Date	October 27, 2016 11:12 AM UTC (9 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/59neia/feminists_are_choking_on_the_red_pill_movie/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/feminists-are-choking-on-the-red-pill-movie.938845 https://theredarchive.com/post/938845

Comments