These women should be made to produce evidence of their sexual misconduct claims against men, or they should be made to shut up. The girly excuses for why they didn't make complaints at the time are pretty thin, to say the least; and they risk bringing dislike and mistrust onto all women, most of whom have not had the experience claimed, nor the inclination to bring men down for the sport of it.

In a recent article by a female journalist who worked for a TV station during the time of unproven charges against a male personality, the female journalist was advised by a cub reporter looking for a story that her name had been connected to the victim list. She replied that if an assault, verbal or physical, hand been made against her she must have 'missed it'.

Why is that crazed feministas can blacken the names of people without evidence, and get away with it? Trial by media has replaced the justice system.

This alleged essay is built on a number of demonstrably false premises?

The first and foundational is the me too assertion, the second is this is what Feminism always does?

Then builds from there like a house of cards with assertion stacked on assumption?

I see nothing credible or noteworthy is this patent misogyny merely masquerading as thoughtful balanced comment, to recommend it!

Just more militant muscular masculinity from the pen of this, [trapped in the medieval past, where women were mere bagatelle or goods and chattels/sexual slaves,] querulous author?

Coffee and blah blah?
No! Yap, yap, growl, yap, yap, whine!
More tea?
Alan B.

Bring out the guillotine, arrange the chairs around the execution stage, for the fine woman from the lustrous sisterhood of the dropped stitch; and heads roll across the stage floor.

It is not an 'alleged' essay, Alan. It is a real essay.

Diver, as always you not only make my points for me! But remarkably, make them bold and underlined!

The sound of hooves galloping over desert sand, accompanied by an orchestra in full voice, giving vent to the William Tell overture.

The Bedouin, sword drawn chases his quarry, a lightly clad, near naked female, ankle chains clashing, running/galloping/stumbling for her very life?

Later a weary camel driver stumbles across the same woman around dusk, buried up to her neck in sand. And seeing her captivating beauty was disposed to ask.

I see you're up to your neck in it? Why so?
Adultery, whispered the young beauty.

I see said the weary traveller, now suppose I were to dig you out of there? What's in it for me?

Whereupon the gorgeous creature looked askance at him, licked her lips, smiled vivaciously and replied, Sand!
Alan B.

THE OTHER ME...
(A life with no rhyme, and not much reason).

Knock knock, two Mormons at the door,
Mormons not, but detectives are.

Come to my office says one with a frown,
You tried in vain, a woman to disavow,
Not so her tale, adds he.

Who me? Says I, my trembling finger pointing at my chest.

Six months past my son he adds.

What's her name, I can't recall?
Me staring vacantly through window of police car,
Heart in my lap.

What did I, that wasn't normal?

Another scene from awful act one, curtain rising,
detective, holding forth paper in either hand.

In one my revealing statement of the night,
In tuther, hers, an identical account.

This is simply an augmented extension of the technique the womens libbers used to get control of the education system.

In that they were a lot more cautious, taking it slowly. First the subtle hints that it was inappropriate for men to have control of little girls in schools. Then the very limited actual example of inappropriate behaviour.

First men were made to feel uncomfortable, then pushed out of the class room altogether. Once in control our "ladies" quickly dumbed down the syllabus, making it easier for more of the girls to appear qualified.

There is no doubt that the great reduction in the quality of our education has followed the feminist take over of the system.

Now it appears the new target is the entertainment industry.

Meanwhile, have any others noticed the catastrophe that is government in Australia today, has grown at the same rate as the number of ladies in the parliaments. You don't have to look too closely at the incompetence of the current girls club in Queensland to see the facts of this.

Never a truer word spoken, Hasbeen. Add all the father-free children in what passes for families these days.

I like this observation from James Howard Kunstler

"We are living in the land of the wounded father. The nature of his wound is not quite specified, but if one were to guess, one might venture that something happened to his testicles. Cut off? Shot off? Industrial accident? We’re not informed. But the remedy for that misfortune is to turn into a woman, or at least act like one.

An interesting angle on all this from, say, a zeitgeist point of view, is that the archetypal father is not missed. Society does not need him. Rather we need him to go through the mystical passage to become a tragic-comic mother figure, a harmless old vessel full of rueful wisdom and comic relief. Of course that is the message that has been coming through loud and clear in the cultural scripts of recent days, with all the carping about cis-gender white folks (i.e. men) being responsible for all the woes of humanity.

My own meta-take on this whole business is that the archetypal father is secretly rather sorely missed in the USA. The mental inversions of the Progressive intelligentsia tell me that, deep down, the Left is in a state of deranged anguish over it. Trump has inflamed them especially because he fills the role of national father so badly for them with his vulgar incoherence. Nothing he does reassures anybody. They are desperate to shove him off-stage. He only reminds them how badly they miss a real and proper daddy. And their rage about it prompts them to destroy anybody else who reminds them of a bad daddy, by any means necessary — sexual misbehavior being a very convenient means in a culture that celebrates its lack of boundaries."

We live in a culture where being 'white, heterosexual and male' means those of us defined this way are to blame for all the ills of society. Go figure, I always thought being white, hetrosexual (at least most of us) and male had resulted in the progress of society, enlightenment and the clarity of opportunity for all.

Apparently not?

Don't know why "feminist" witch drowning became illegal?
http://youtu.be/zrzMhU_4m-g

Should there be law regression to meet the tastes of the 80% old-bold male commentariat of OLO?

Yes, it must be very difficult to prove sexual assault, unless extreme force has been used. Drastic changes in behaviour, observable immediately afterwards ? A medical examination immediately afterwards ? Statements to friends immediately after ? These might go some way to demonstrating that assault has occurred. A lie detector test ? A series of similar claims ? Description of extremely personal details ? Bragging by the bloke, such as 'It's easy, you just grab them by the pussy, they don't mind ..." Now, who said that ?

After all, an assaulter is not going (!?) to video what he is doing. He may not use, or have to use, extreme force - an extreme power imbalance might 'persuade' the woman to comply with his wishes, for her career if not her physical safety. And we ARE taking about men with a great deal of power and influence. Perhaps there have been women in similar favourable positions ?

Yes, it is going to be very difficult to ping these scum-bags for what they might have done. And anyway, to cite NoMoore and Trump, that all happened years ago. So it sort of didn't happen then, did it ?

Joe

Well said Joe.

Simple fact is a female just has to say it happened and you did it, immediately in the eyes of the gullible public via MSM you are guilty.

Good luck trying to prove you did not, does not matter there are no witnesses or evidence or the fact it happened 30+ years ago.

I do believe a lot are true but there potentially is big money to be made by false claims.

Guilty until you can prove otherwise is now the norm.

One of the key feminist ideas around these types of incidents is that we tend to blame the victim. While there is some truth to the idea, once an allegation is made, any other evidence is dismissed. Another problem is unspoken assumptions about who can be seen as a victim. It all adds up to women's voices being given more weight than men's.

I also wonder what is going on behind the scenes. Several female actors must have jumped in bed with Hervey Weinstein. I suspect he is keeping quiet in exchange for agreements not to sue. If he ever returns fire, I wonder what will come out.

Many girls also give themselves away cheaply and then live with regret. Once they begin to hate men anything is possible. Truth is that their were/are many women willing to jump the queue by sleeping around while many men willing to take advantage. Secularism has absolutely no moral basis so why not is the obvious question.

http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/real-life/true-stories/student-liam-allans-rape-charges-scrapped-after-40000-messages-from-accuser-revealed-in-court/news-story/4d2a6cdb2414427fab5dc69df62d4bc8

how many more innocent men lose careers and futures over spiteful women

Forget the female versus' male aspects of these cases, and THINK. The real issue here is the fact that 'innocent until proven guilty' has been reversed to 'guilty until proven innocent'. One of these women in America is reported as saying - after it was proved that something said in a college year book was downright incorrect- “Yes, but that doesn't prove his innocence”.

The comment could have been a Freudian slip, but given the loose-lipped and contemptuous attitude of feminists these days, it is more likely that men now have to prove their innocence, and the Feminazis can say whatever they like about emasculated men and get away with it. It is more than likely that, unless the battle axes are brought to heel, and made to respect the law, that this situation will apply to every alleged crime. How about throwing men in the water and, if they sink they are innocent, but if they float they are guilty! That's the sort of barbarism and witch-hunting these apologies for women want to return to.

In the meantime, it is good to see Geoffrey Rush is going to put the law onto the female/s who have publicly accused him of offences, believing that they can get away with impugning his reputation publicly without due costs to themselves.

Hear, hear and well said Joe.

Moreover, I like the idea of a lie detector test! Not just any lie detector test, but something not even psychotic compulsive lairs can't beat!

And here I'm referring to a combination of space age technologies. i.e. Computer assisted facial recognition that picks up the tiny, tale tail facial twitches, that identify deception or intended deception, too quick for the human eye!

And thermal imaging, which always picks up the particular hot spots, on a specific area of brain, when deception is being consciously and deliberately practised! And by whomsoever! Even the most gifted lairs in creation!

Even where the standard polygraph test registers nought! And when the lair is found out? Be they the offending and gotten away with it offender, or duplicitous claimant?

Let them be the charged with false witness and sentenced for CONFIRMED repeated perjury! Individual count by count! And the original crime, if the substantiated and tested evidence proves it?

None hardly more damaging and consequential, than the sexual abuse of innocent children followed by the rape of virgins by the rich and powerful; and justice meted out to only those who can afford it!

With the evidence tested and substantiated or disproved, with unbeatable space age lie detection!

Leniency only offered where full and thorough disclosure is added to the record along with offered appropriate compensation.

These cases need to be taken seriously. When #1/ They can incarcerate the innocent!

And #2/ Allow the lowest scum on earth, to escape righteous justice!

Let's test the evidence, with unbeatable space age lie detection, then let the chips fall where they may. And on whomever they may!

Not for nothing are the scales of just held aloft by a blindfolded Angel!

Enough victim blaming already!
Alan B.

Bad company ruins good morals runner (1cor 15:33). Or buyer beware!

Your reference highlights the importance of caution. And yes, the law is merciless and blinded by money, not blind in dispensing justice.

The DPP especially, are a major impediment to justice, (highlighted in your reference). This department is peopled by some evil man haters, call them "dykes".

Ward off the attack early is the best defence, and counter attack quickly.

My abstract post above, is a true story!

The DPP weren't too fast off the mark, with equality before the law! When a young mother was first plied with liberal liquor on a NSW beach, then raped and subsequently mutilated by a fist forced up her vagina! Then left by the callous defendants to bleed to death in the hours when actionable alacrity could have saved her life.

As her grieving Dad asked, why couldn't they have asked then taken what they wanted, gently!?

And initially the murder by mutilation, wasn't pursued by the DPP? Whose, [par for the course,] initial (victim blaming) sympathies seemed to have entirely favoured the offenders?

Because its widely assumed she was scantily clad, an aborigine and habitual drunk? And consequently asking for it and all that followed. Allegedly?

Nonetheless, somebody's Daughter Sister and Mother!

And true of every prostitute, whore or dyke. (Mary Magdalene) (Joan of Arc)

And a very Christian, moralising Diver, would likely be singing a very different song as would ttbn, if one of those, "she was easy", victims? Was his/their Mum, Sister or Daughter!

And then castration would be too good for the mongrel?

The above, also true story and reported by a socially responsible four corners!

There is only one place for these sub humans and their like minded apologists. And that's anywhere else but here and with whomsoever will have them, like say Ecuador?

Time to end the self excusing BS and test the evidence and or alleged witness statements with unbeatable space age lie detection!

Which may be the only means we have at our disposal to sort fiction from fact from conflicting accounts.

At the end of the day, justice is always served by the whole truth and nothing but the truth!

And demonstrably not served by further traumatising victims with threats and public badgering or intimidation. That's used for one purpose and one purpose only? And that is to hide and cover up the truth rather than reveal it!

And where that happens, justice, truth and honour, is not served but subverted!
Alan B.

AlanB

>The DPP weren't too fast off the mark, with equality before the law! When a young mother was first plied with liberal liquor on a NSW beach, then raped and subsequently mutilated by a fist forced up her vagina! Then left by the callous defendants to bleed to death in the hours when actionable alacrity >could have saved her life.

What you wrote is the extreme, many of the accusations being made, are about men putting a hand on a knee or bottom or making suggestive comments or inappropriate comments (in her opinion)

It has been shown that two men can make the same comment and one maybe regarded as a sleazebag and the other her knight in shining armour. So what is one woman's knight in shining armour, is anothers sleazebag.

"I have been a victim of each component of the sexual assault spectrum of which you speak. They all hurt. And they are all connected to a patriarchy intertwined with normalised, accepted - even welcomed - misogyny."

What a mish mash of a statement.

Men being attracted to women is connected to patriarchy.
Men being attracted to women and acting inappropriately is misogyny.

Someone is being a bit biased, lets look at the other side.

Women being attracted to Men is connected to security.

Women being attracted to Men is connected to Money in a lot of cases.

Women being attracted to Men is connected to bad boy image.

Women being attracted to Men is connected to wanting someone like there father.

Women being attracted to Men is connected to perceived love.

Women being attracted to Men is connected to fill in your own reason.

Women being attracted to Men and acting inappropriately is power.

Women being attracted to Men and acting inappropriately is hatred for men.

Women being attracted to Men and acting inappropriately according to feminists does not happen.

Women being attracted to Men and acting inappropriately is ?.

Wolly, just reporting established facts, now part of an archived public record!

And it seems quite a few "blokes" want no bar of having their side of, the endlessly repeated, it was her fault, story. Nearly as old as time, properly tested? I wonder why!

Perhaps the Bard has some wisdom for us in the words. Methinks thou dost protest too much!
Alan B.

Alan B,

to make a comparison, when there is plane accident, no stone is left unturned to find the cause of the accident, this includes examing human behaviour.

It is a travesty of justice that people who commit crimes do get to be found innocent or have charges against them dropped because of lack of evidence.

Something like 70% of human communication is body language, with verbal, including tone making up the other 30%. yet we rely on he said, she said.

It is a no win situation for men.
Nature seems to have established the norm that the man pursues the woman.
The women give off signals that men attempt to read.
The man makes a move and may get a positive reaction to which he responds.
His move may not be quite what she had in mind, so she rejects him
and calls him a creep.
20 years later she is on TV telling the world he is a creep.

Hi Bazz,

I'm not so sure: there are ways and ways for a man to hook up with a woman, some far less intrusive than others. Clearly it requires some positive response, even initiative, from the woman: a touch on the arm, a smile, steady and positive eye contact, sharing of personal details, perhaps a mutually agreed private one-to-one dinner date or some other shared activity outside of work or organisational activity, and so on.

I'm no expert, and as a recent widower, I'm very much out of practice (and enthusiasm), but it shouldn't be that hard to read someone's language, including body language, one way or the other. Since there's no real need to rush, each party can take it one mutually-acceptable step at a time. There's certainly no need to 'grab a woman on the pussy' or touch her inappropriately anywhere.

Obviously, those types of assault may be seen as some sort of entitlement by men with power over women (and other men) in a subordinate position - that's obvious in the alleged cases of certain US politicians, Rolf Harris, Harvey Weinstein, Kevin Spacey, and so on and on.

Power imbalances are also obvious in the plethora of cases of institutional abuse of children exposed by the Royal Commission here. How to avoid the misuse of that power imbalance ? What procedures should be adopted in the case of vulnerable children, or by people in the workplace ? Those seem to be the pressing issues, as well as exposing perpetrators.

Joe

Ok Jo,

You are talking about two different things, child abuse versus sexual harassment. Children have less power than adults although I suspect that it is much more complicated than that.

"If men have all the power, How come women make the rules?"
http://www.revolucionantifeminista.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/how-can-women-make-the-rules.pdf

quote/
"Men have been trained and conditioned by women, not unlike the way Pavlov conditioned his dogs, into becoming their slaves. As compensation for their labours men are given periodic use of a woman's vagina." The book contends that young boys are encouraged to associate their masculinity with their ability to be sexually intimate with a woman, and that a woman can control a man by socially empowering herself to be the gate-keeper to his sense of masculinity. Vilar states that this has been going on for some time.
unquote/

I put it the members of this forum, that there is maybe more than one valid viewpoint.

Wolly,

You miss the vital point that such involvement has to be voluntary, consensual. I don't know how there can be 'more than one viewpoint' on that. Yes, women may be the gate-keepers of all of their body parts, but no man has any right to 'break in'.

Joe

Hey! What's with the two exactly the same articles. I just posted on the other one only to find the exact same one here. WTF?

I can't remember exactly what I said, but it matters not as long as the theme is clear. One very critical point I wish to highlight is that, what happened many years ago was the norm back then, so we must not apply current social thinking or laws of today. Not withstanding the BS that 'she was too scared to say anything', there was always an avenue if she was truly 'assaulted'. I lived through those years and I saw and still don't see any wrong doing. It is suddenly wrong because of this bloody political correctness. We men are to blame since (not me) the soft cocks were allowed to have a say, we have lost control. I have seen a very disturbing change in men over the course of my lifetime. They have become more like women and the women have become more like men. I actually don't care about all this groping BS. The women and the soft cocks came up with this new world order. Women have made a real dogs breakfast of the situation as is expected. Nature is entrenched in all of us we are men and programed to be attracted to women. The women get all 'tarted up' and make themselves attractive to men. This new culture expects us men to reject our natural and in-bred instincts and rather than try and 'cop a feel', look away? Yeah right. As far as I am concerned guys grow some stones and start telling the women to shut up or else, and start taking control again. Where we are now and heading even further, might be a good place for women but it's a bad place for men.