Pants-of-dog wrote:Why would someone go to the trouble of bribing four women for this?
The same reason Hilary Clinton spent $10M on a fake dossier.
Pants-of-dog wrote:Also, why do men always bring up the possibility of false rape allegations, but not for other crimes?
You mean like being a neo-Nazi while running over a fat leftist woman?
Oxymoron wrote:I am the same with any allegation, I believe in innocent till proven guilty.
Yeah, and I believe in the timeliness of an allegation as well.
Pants-of-dog wrote:For example, when black men are shot, most conservatives such as yourself assume the black man was guilty of something that exonerates the police officer.
Like the suspect saying, "Fuck what you say" and going for the police officer's gun, discharging a round and then fleeing?
Noemon Edit: Rule 16Godstud wrote:Here is one of your fucking "justified shootings". An unarmed man shot by a fearful racist cocksucker.
Mikema63 doesn't like people using the term "cocksucker" in anger, even though gay people do it all the time.
Pants-of-dog wrote:I still want to know why some men always bring up the claim of false rape allegations, even when there is no evidence for such a claim.
30 years is just a wee bit too late to start complaining.
Godstud wrote:I have no doubt that false rape charges can be very damaging(in some rare instances), but most of the time, these charges turn out to be true.
Do you have evidence for that? The notion of "he said, she said" is essentially about woman claiming they were raped after they got in a fight with their boyfriend. "Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned" isn't a saying for no reason.
Rich wrote:Please provide evidence for this claim.
I'm middle class. Upper middle maybe, but I'm not rich. Really...
Rich wrote:It should also be noted that what would be labelled paedophilia and statutory rape in some countires is recognised as apart of the cherished institution of marriage in some American states. What was / is the age of consent in Alabama?
The age of consent was about 10 years old until around the turn of the last century.
mikema63 wrote:First we watch the right defend NAZI's and we thought it was the lowest they could go.
Nobody is defending Nazis as such. We're just trying to make sure that a schizophrenic isn't subject to human sacrifice at the hands of angry BLM/Antifa/SURJ types who went looking for violence and found it.
mikema63 wrote:And then the right started defending a pedophile and calling the young girls he victimized sluts and liars.
Look, there are some timely charges against Weinstein. They are the only ones that matter. If you aren't going to complain in a timely manner, there's simply no point in asking to be taken seriously 30 years later about 3 weeks before an election in a case that can scarcely be proven.
Pants-of-dog wrote:Many (perhaps even a majority?) of US conservatuves only care about sexual assault if the perpetrator is Muslim or Clinton.
Sexual harassment became a tort after the Democrats failed to derail the Clarence Thomas nomination. It was Democrats who made that a part of the law, and it was Clinton who was the first major Democrat to fall victim to this bullshit.
Sorry, but we're not interested in who our adversaries think is a sexual deviant given their own norms that would be considered deviant by most.
"We have put together the most extensive and inclusive voter fraud organization in the history of American politics."
-- Joe Biden