skinster wrote::D
I have no idea what that means.
But if you need me to spell it out, I deviate here from the ideologically pure (though intellectually invalid) notion that '
we must believe the accusers' (quotations/italics to denote meme).
I am not ideologically pure here, because I don't believe the accusation was legitimate from what I've heard. Sounds like the girl used the facade of employer harassment litigation to go after a pro athlete for money, on flimsy basis, and through a phony means. I don't think she was an employee. She played in his garage band. I seriously doubt they made any money, and the intent was probably not to make money. She is probably just completely full of shit, and strongarmed a settlement.
Now, that is all beside the point. I suppose that such a potentiality is relevant for demonstrating nuance, but the entire point had to do with the systematic absence of nuance when it comes to ideological purity.
It is also the ideological purity of the Democrats in the US which assure they will remain a fringe group, with their insistence on 'identity politics' (probably this insistence is because identity politics are brandable, and they have also been losing the 'identity politics' to Republicans for a good while. Mostly though, it is just brandable. #metoo, for example, is a brand.)