Oh boy. You have to listen to what this woman thinks MRAs are advocating for with respect to Title IX. She claims that MRAs are for having impunity for men who commit sexual harm. The fuck? The only thing I can think of is maybe that Roosh article from years ago. I don't know anyone who says men shouldn't get punished. I vehemently disagree with anything like that. People who do horrible things, and are convicted in a court of law, deserve their punishment.

That's particularly smelly bullshit. But mostly what she believes MRAs believe, she's making up or living in another world. I don't have any idea where this stuff comes from.

Of course these feminists don't like the new changes. I'm not sure about at least one thing; DeVos lumped sexual assault into the same category as sexual harassment. ? The Fark? Two very different things.

But, there is now a repeated offense required (for things other than grape and sexual assault) so at least 'stare' grape must be pervasive and repeated in order to violate. That's good.

When the lawyer in the video says there are 'fair' processes and 'due process' is 'nuanced' (essentially) what she means is, the proceedings are not fair if he's not convicted. Nuanced due process means a lesser burden of proof in the REAL criminal court...and so on and so forth.

And the 'victims' afraid to come and report? How is that even something? It's essentially the same except clear and convincing...evidence...oh...proof now is required...ah...so, it takes more than an accusation? And she might have to answer questions, be cross examined! OH SHOCK! HORROR!

The Institute for Research of Male Supremacism

[ Ссылка ]

New Title IX Guidelines

[ Ссылка ]

Dear Colleague Letter

[ Ссылка ]

Like! Subscribe! Comment! Share!

Original Content

Copyright 2020 James Maxwell, All Rights Reserved

Fair Use Claimed

свернуть