Men's RightsCNN attempts to drum up outrage about a university president who dares to tell female students the truth. That many rape claims are nothing more than morning after regret. (self.TheRedPill)
submitted 4 years ago by [deleted]
CNN attempts to drum up outrage about a university president who dares to tell female students the truth. That many rape claims are nothing more than morning after regret.
BP pussy pundit claims he was offended. Panel thinks acknowledging the truth, that many rape claims aren't actually rape, are an attempt to dissuade women from reporting rape.
Moral: Don't call out women who lie and attempt to falsely convict innocent men of rape. It may make real rape victims not come forward.
[–]bat_mayn 21 points22 points23 points 4 years ago* (3 children)
Or.. or.. just maybe, you can continue over-sensationalizing every normal sexual or physical contact, and believing the dogma verbatim, and you will achieve your self-fulfilling prophecy of no one reporting rape or taking it seriously.
No one thinks rape is cool, no one is okay with rape. There is no rape culture. Any man in this sub would likely beat the ever living shit out of a man if he was caught raping. In prison, rapists are often brutalized.
But continue on with trivializing rape, and you'll get your sick wish - rape will go unchecked, because no one wants to be involved in what is another bullshit untrue scandal. No justice system, no fairness, "Just believe". Then it will happen, the system will fail women and they will never have justice in a system designed around "feels".
These people are the true progenitors of the filth and chaos they go on about. Just utterly filthy, worthless scum. It's all over their fucking faces and everything they do.
[–]couchpotatocarl 9 points10 points11 points 4 years ago (0 children)
Completely disagree that women will reap what they sow for perpetuating this bs. At least not directly. The average happiness of women will just slowly deteriorate over time w/o them even knowing why. Believe me though that men will continue to have the short end of the stick on this, and no 'uprising' will be successful.
I think you severely underestimate the powers at play here. Any uprising will only serve as a catalyst for whatever agenda they have. It will just be used to orchestrate society into whatever direction they now want it.
Obama is pushing to make the internet a utility. They've had their eye on the internet for a while, sopa etc., and want to establish government involvement and rulings online to become the norm and accepted. This is the foot in the door. Expect to start slowly losing freedoms online as the web becomes policed and all free/male spaces are weeded out.
Whatever uprising may occur will be the calm before the storm. At that point women will side with the side that will win. Men will be forced to comply or suffer. Women will happily look the other way as usual as they don't value true freedoms and are bred masters at doublethink anyway.
[–][deleted] -5 points-4 points-3 points 4 years ago (1 child)
While I generally agree with you, there are people who think rape is deserved sometimes. Just because we associate with normal, decent people doesn't mean everyone is. Although I still don't think we have a rape culture at all, the opposite if anything.
[–]smith5ar 67 points68 points69 points 4 years ago (10 children)
It's too bad with situations like this, the discussion tends to head towards, "this will make real rape victims less likely to come forward." Even if this is true, I don't see many people arguing the reason why this president would make these comments. The discussion on panels like this never discuss the actual problem, which is the women who are legitimately lying about rape claims. This president says he was trying to discuss personal responsibility with regret sex, then the panel doesn't even acknowledge even once that false rape claims are a problem, or even a thing. Most likely because that would place blame on women, and we all know society just can't blame women for anything.
[–]Dorrog 49 points50 points51 points 4 years ago (4 children)
It's not true, it's a bunch of bollocks. Just because you acuse someone of rape and the accused is found not guilty, does not mean you are going to be even prosecuted for false rape, let alone convicted.
Nobody says please don't tell some theft reports are false just to claim the insurance because that will make other people not report real thefts. You'd be called retarded for saying that. But because of the feminist histeria nobody dares confront the same reasoning when it comes to rape.
[–]usku 7 points8 points9 points 4 years ago (2 children)
Sorry was driving me nuts every time I re-read it.
[–]dhump 14 points15 points16 points 4 years ago (1 child)
Hysteria is an adequate description of this kind of crap, when you consider the origin of the word.
[–]usku 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (0 children)
Absolutely. Hysteria, as opposed to histeria.
[–]Moneyley -2 points-1 points0 points 4 years ago (0 children)
Can confirm on sharing on losses. Im an insurance agent
[–]RockTurgidson 27 points27 points27 points 4 years ago [recovered]
See, the thing is, who are the victims of false rape claims? Men. And a lot of them, minority men. Check out the story of Brian Banks and look up the Innocence Project. The vast majority of the convictions they get overturned are sexual assault abd rape convictions. Clearly a problem exists.
Bit the thing is, the majority of Americans are more sympathetic to a young white girl crying about rape than they are to a Hispanic dude who was wrongfully convicted.
In the irony of all ironies, I've seen SJWs and feminists on Reddit say getting falsely accused of rape is a situation YOU pit yourself in, and that you're to blame if shit goes awry. Sound familiar? Victim blaming!
[–]Endorsed ContributorRed_August 4 points5 points6 points 4 years ago (0 children)
Very true. Notice how the panel completely glosses over the fact that there were three falsely accused men here. This is really serious shit! The panel busied itself scrambling to find the "company line" and gave the usual lip service to the PC/feminist overlords. Watch how they nod their heads in unison whenever someone hits a feminist talking point. It is unbelievably pathetic. They fear being contrarian even accidentally.
[–][deleted] 7 points8 points9 points 4 years ago (1 child)
We've all seen the field reports of girls telling their girlfriends "Just say he raped you"
[–]1oldredder 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children)
SO true. I look for red-flags every time I meet a new girl and among them is BPD. likely to say rape for no reason but regret, gold-digger, thief, or tries to pit men at each other to fight each other for her entertainment. If I sense for any reason this is a problem girl I distance myself like she's got ebola. I don't care if she's 10/10 hotness. The juice isn't worth the squeeze.
[–]Rhodos 16 points17 points18 points 4 years ago (0 children)
The video is actually longer:
What really pisses me off is the fact that CNN cut the best part out: he's telling young women what every decent parent would say: if you slut up, you are not marriage material. If you slut up, you will not attract guys that respect you and that protect you, but the opposite. He's telling women to make smart decisions and to not expect everyone else to protect them from dumb decisions.
It blows my mind that college women need to be told this. If you go in a bad neighborhood by yourself, drunk off your ass while sporting tons of bling... yes, you will have a giant chance of being mugged. Sure, in an utopian society you can say that you didn't deserve to be mugged, but in the real world... you acted fucking dumb! You are not a retarded child... you are a fucking adult that should have common sense!
How is this not common knowledge?????
[–]Senior Contributor: "The Court Jester"GayLubeOil 115 points116 points117 points 4 years ago (16 children)
Good. I want CNN to take the side of SJWs. Then maybe more men will start to realize that the mainstream is not operating in our interest. The more they fuck us the more of us wake up.
[–]youngbulker 15 points16 points17 points 4 years ago (14 children)
Well to say they're not operating in our interest is true, they're operating on the interests of feminists (purposefully or not). But why we would want news organizations to operate on the behalf of anyone is questionable. Why not just report unbiased and let people make their decision off the material?
Now the problem with that is that of course they cant make their own decisions because they've been told what to think since forever and hvae to consider that 99% of females tap into mainstream media sources and gather their information from them because A: its mainstream and B: women basically have to follow what everyone else is thinking. (similar phenomenon to how women only find a guy attractive if many other women think so too). I'd venture to say the figure on males following mainstream is significantly less, 80% would be my guess but it could be more. That's a tangent though.
I guess my point is news sources should not be operating on the interests of anyone in the sense of pushing political narratives.
[–]Pornography_saves_li 7 points8 points9 points 4 years ago (2 children)
Every media outlet - all of them - in the USA, is owned by one of 6 major corporations.
To believe the mainstream media is anything but 24/7 propaganda for corporate/elite interests is delusional.
[–]youngbulker 4 points5 points6 points 4 years ago (1 child)
To believe the mainstream media is anything but 24/7 propaganda for corporate/elite interests is delusional.
I agree with you here. Anyone with half a brain can go research on their own and avoid the bs spewed by those news agencies. The thing is 99% of women don't seem to have half a brain regarding this.
[–]Pornography_saves_li 5 points6 points7 points 4 years ago (0 children)
I'm thinking 'men' don't get a pass here either. Common sense is outright rare these days.
[–]BoTuLoX 26 points27 points28 points 4 years ago (8 children)
I guess my point is news sources should not be operating on the interests of anyone in the sense of pushing political narratives.
Hahahahahahaha. Oh wow. You made me remember when I believed in Santa.
Get back to reality son, the people who own the media have their own agenda and don't give a shit about anything if they want to push it.
[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points 4 years ago (7 children)
BBC does an excellent job. I can't think of a American news outlet who doesn't have some sort of political agenda.
[–]skyisup 6 points7 points8 points 4 years ago (1 child)
Funded by the tax payers, but separate from the government is probably the best way to have a news organization that is somewhat impartial. It's far from perfect but seems to work pretty well for the BBC and Nordic countries that have their services modelled after BBC.
[–]Endorsed ContributorRed_August 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (0 children)
This is true, and it remains a good model, but unfortunately the BBC has very much been overtly penetrated by an agenda far unrepresentative of its viewership.
[–]stuntaneous 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (3 children)
Also, the Australian ABC and SBS. The Guardian does quite well, too.
[–]Statecensor 8 points9 points10 points 4 years ago (1 child)
NPR is pretty hardcore left wing. They only have on extremely liberal and progressive Republicans and are neck deep in social justice movements on their news editorial shows. They only look moderate compared to the left wing nut jobs over at Air America (are they still running?) and Pacifica Radio Network.
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (0 children)
I would say the issues they chose to center around tend to be left leaning surely but the information they put out is factual. Hardcore seems a big jump.
[–]TheInkerman 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children)
the Australian ABC and SBS
the Australian ABC and SBS
Ah what? Both the ABC and SBS are grossly left wing. SBS has always been generally shit so their bias didn't matter, but the ABC is actively pro-Labor and the left wing, they don't even try to hide it anymore.
[–][deleted] 8 points9 points10 points 4 years ago (0 children)
The US is capitalistic. Any news station that reports the unbiased truth will not make as much money, and they will lose out to other news stations that report controversial junk that gets people riled up and excited.
If your business isn't squeezing out every last dollar it can, then you will be outperformed by one that does.
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children)
News sources don't just spin for politics. People want to hear politically spun news.
[–]ColdEiric 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children)
I like incidents like this one. They force groups to show their true colours, and we men can see if they are in our interests or not.
"If you are not with us, then you are against us."
[–][deleted] 81 points82 points83 points 4 years ago (21 children)
He needs to read up on his 48 Laws of Power:
Law 38: Think as you like, but behave like others
[–][deleted] 88 points89 points90 points 4 years ago (14 children)
Rather dangerous for everyone who is already in a position of power to invest so heavily in groupthink, though. Makes sense on the way up, but if nobody has enough nuts to say anything once they've climbed the hill, society will be truly fucked.
[–][deleted] 14 points15 points16 points 4 years ago (9 children)
That's the dilemma. Perhaps that's what it takes to remain with power.
[–]DarthRoach 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (7 children)
Ever heard of Winston Churchill?
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (1 child)
yh he got ditched quicksharp after the war after wanting to prepare for ww3
[–]DarthRoach 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children)
He was PM again from 51 to 55. He wasn't the kind of guy who just goes with the flow.
[–][deleted] -5 points-5 points-5 points 4 years ago
[–]Backfist 18 points19 points20 points 4 years ago (1 child)
Its good to have a go getter around when the Luftwaffe starts bombing the piss out of your cities.
[–]RojoEscarlata 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (0 children)
He does have a point (worded badly)
Churchill was a great leader for war times, but he lacked the diplomatic touch that those post war times needed.
[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (0 children)
Clearly this sort of thinking is disadvantageous for the world at large, though
[–]alpha_n3rd 4 points5 points6 points 4 years ago (0 children)
It's a tradeoff. Think of it more in terms of political capital. This guy might have enough political capital that he can afford to spend some on non-PC remarks like this.
[–]couchpotatocarl 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago* (0 children)
It is legal to dronestrike citizens now. No need for a trial. You think it is remotely unlikely for a family with trillions whose interests you go against wouldn't pay a few million or even billion to whatever politician/cia/foreign govt./etc to get rid of a viable threat to their control of the sheep? Money means nothing to them. Their source of income is their control. Try to threaten it. I dare you. The last time people will hear your name is on a list of passengers on a missing airplane. Or maybe you'll be suspected of having ties with Isis as they blast your ass out of orbit. They will get you before you gain any momentum.
It's how the system works. For example, new politicians get desperately needed campaing funds from lobbying firms who say "Don't worry about it".
2 or 4 years later when they are up for re-election then the same lobby firms come back saying "Hey, you owe us a favor if you want to get our donation again."
If you choose to turn against your people (not like this guy) you will win loyalty points but lose your job.
I disagree. You're assuming that people in a position of power give a shit if society is truly fucked. Why rock the boat? You can blend in, and ride your position of power all the way down.
[–]masturbator9000 8 points9 points10 points 4 years ago (0 children)
And where would we be now if everyone did that? Just suck it up and act like everyone else....?
[–]Hank711 6 points7 points8 points 4 years ago (0 children)
If dude wants to stay in power, sure. But most university presidents were former faculty members who care about more about truth and will return to research and teaching after their presidency.
Stealing top comment for exposure. I had already gathered this from what I had already seen of him, but Neev from Catfish is the biggest bitch ever.
But then again, could you imagine just how fucked he would have been if were to have agreed to with the President? CNN would have gone on the attack. Multiple social media outlets would be labeling him a sexist.
I'm not kidding, I bought this book for one of my friends specifically so he'd read Law 38.
The problem is, colleges can only continue the circlejerk of anti-male bullshit so far. You drive men away from your institution, you take your college off the map in terms of STEM / business / other high ROI fields. At some point the guys at the top are going to be incentivised to stop this circlejerk - right now behaving like others gets you positive attention, but when the practical minded young men who are going to become the next tech entrepreneurs, doctors, businessmen, engineers, etc start to choose a less anti-male school...
Chances are you are right, but perhaps we're at that point where even the RP minded guys at the top are thinking "going along with this will fuck us later"
[–]circlhat -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (0 children)
It seems to have worked for feminist and they certainly did not behave like others.
[–]thesaltysoup 10 points11 points12 points 4 years ago (1 child)
Well, the news must be slow this week. They've exhausted all whining about the midterms, and they need to regroup and find a new witch to burn to consolidate the moping democratic base.
Remember, sheep, everyone is out to get you. Your neighbors voted republican, the police indiscriminately slaughter scores of unarmed young black men and now the presidents of universities are victim blaming and rape apologists. The cards are stacked against you, so keep voting blue and double down on that feminist, victimized narrative.
Excellent move to save face in the light of the fact that only a small, radical leftist core of people are pushing for this shit to sweep across America. Tow the party line, boys and girls, keep up the good fight. Jeer at this witch, and throw more kindling on the fire so we can keep the outrage machine running at full speed.
Fuck this era. I need a smoke.
[–]tomatoist 11 points12 points13 points 4 years ago (1 child)
Telling the truth comes at a high price these days. I applaud this brave man.
[–]Philhelm 11 points12 points13 points 4 years ago (0 children)
Truth is treason in an empire of lies.
[–][deleted] 21 points22 points23 points 4 years ago (3 children)
I'm sick and tired of these sappy men, either shut the fuck up and plot quietly or speak the fuck out and stop being a beta simp and apologizing after you rustle jimmies.
These are the worst cancers in the world because they are the FENCE sitters and EVERYONE hates the fence sitter. Take a side and stick to it.
[–][deleted] 10 points10 points10 points 4 years ago
[–]FrenchMaybe[🍰] 3 points4 points5 points 4 years ago (0 children)
He shouldn't have apologized, but then again he's job is probably hanging by a thread now that the feminists are coming out of the woodwork.
This guy is fucked at this point, no matter what he says or does, that's the sad part. Instead of having people take responsibility for their actions (girls falsely crying rape) people hear his message as an attack on women. Oh plllleeeaaasseee.
[–]zeny_two 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago* (0 children)
He only apologized for his word choice. What his apology says is "I was right, but I chose the wrong words."
As they are quick to forgive, when the PC crowd hears the words "I apologize" they turn the dial down from enraged to begrudging, and it seems like he understands that. I think he's trying to save his ass and remain righteous
[–][deleted] 7 points8 points9 points 4 years ago (0 children)
Well, my outrage has been drummed-up.
[–]masturbator9000 6 points7 points8 points 4 years ago (0 children)
This is sickening. I mean he says right there that it has happened three times before and that's just being ignored. Instead, that dried out old hag basically suggests to sue the guy and involves civil rights.
[–]xthemoonx 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children)
to me, it didnt sound like the uni president said "all women lie if they dont get what they want" he said there were CASES...ACTUAL CASES. actual cases people lying about rape doesnt mean everyone lies about rape for fuck sake. he said THREE people lied about rape...but accoring to every dumb ass at CNN 3=every woman. id like to kno how many women were actually raped at that school and how that was handled. pretty sure they handled it properly and didnt accuse victims lying about the assaults.
President of college states facts about frivolous false rape claims. CNN panel harps about how rape claims can't be frivolous.
Get logic'd, shitlords.
P.S. Notice how the President's apology was taken by the panel with their chortles. Such is why you should only apologize when absolutely necessary. (h/t Heartiste)
[–]occupythekitchen 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children)
I love how they are trying to dissuade real rape victims to come forward instead of dissuade fake rape victims from making a fake rape report.
[–]BuckStricklandx 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children)
lol "as a man did you find this offensive?" Cmon man its CNN we already know the answer to this hahaha
[–]Vietnom 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children)
And here we have an example of the good side of TRP. This is a very great observation. There is a double standard here that needs to be highlighted. And the media manipulation needs to be called out for what it is.
He states three examples of false rape accusations. I assume each accusation would have been investigated thoroughly by the university (is it TITLE 9 - federally funded institution mandate it?) and that CNN harpy seems to be only concerned with the outcome of possible future events rather than the suffering those falsely accused go through.
The poor wimminz might suffer!
[–]Dr_Wally 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children)
I like how the host of MTV's Catfish is the first boy to speak on this topic.
[–]ECoast_Man 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children)
Yes means yes legislation, kangaroo university rape tribunals, anything else to empower women at the expense of the due process of men... all premised on:
"No ECoast_Man, men's concerns about fake rape accusations are groundless. The evidence is that it happens almost never, it is a minuscule possibility"
Wonder what happened to all the evidence?
[–]zombiesunflower 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children)
link to his speech https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jtddnI4dUHE
[–]Tilting_Gambit 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children)
I'm gonna do some analysis real quick.
I think we can all agree that if more false claims were being punished, less false claims would be made. That's logical, right? The president in this clip could be referring to anything else. If he warns people that any cheating or collusion during exams would be taken seriously, nobody would have any issues. He's confronting a problem that exists in a manner that he's entitled to. The fact that it turns into a bashing session on CNN is only happening because it's a hot topic: rape.
Let's address the comment: "Warning an individual not to lie will make them less likely to tell the truth, because they're afraid of being punished for lying."
This statement is the fallback plan and it's wheeled out for every conversation about false rape. Let's address an issue that's a real thing. Not all rape is a back alley, knife to the throat, traumatic and violent kinda thing. Most rape occurs between two individuals who already know each other, usually under the influence of drugs or alcohol.
This is an uncomfortable topic for most guys on TRP, because we know there's a fine line between being a dominant male, firmly showing a woman that it's ok to be sexual and pushing her too far.
To me, saying that "real rape victims will not come forward if we punish the false rape accusers" may actually influence a small group of people. The group that were somewhat unsure about whether they really wanted the sex or not: i.e. they get home the next day and are kinda embarrassed or unsure about what happened. They may "feel" like it was unwanted pressure or whatnot. Under encouragement from feminist types these women would theoretically be capable of claiming it was rape, even though it was probably just a grey area where neither party was fully accountable, the man didn't think he was doing anything wrong and both people can keep going with their lives. Nothing particularly traumatic has happened. The girl never said "No" and the guy never said "No" either. Being told to not place false rape claims may prevent this woman (or man) from destroying the other persons life after a night of drunken sex.
But I need to be fair. If it's possible that warnings about false rape will dissuade the people from the "grey area" who weren't sure, it's possible it will dissuade people from the black area who didn't want the sex, were reluctant, tried to get the other person to stop, but never said "No" or verbalized the "Stop" signals. This is possible. I think it follows logically. Whatever your thoughts on sex like this are, the law would be willing to convict a person of continuing sex after signs that the other person doesn't want to. So we have to deal with that. The law calls it rape.
For me, this is fine. Because two problems still exist. Individuals who don't come forward with genuine rape cases and individuals who falsely accuse others of rape. I wholeheartedly believe that society is covering the topic of genuine rape. I think the majority of women would come forward these days, men probably not so much (another issue). The problem that should be getting dealt with is the false rape accusations. It should NOT be a case of "Either we encourage women to come forward about rape, or we allow false rape accusations to hit the headlines." It's NOT a one or the other type of thing. You CAN encourage people to do the right thing in both cases and no social cone of silence should be placed on either topic.
But hey, that's just my thoughts.
[–]SchrodingersRapist 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children)
I don't see why CNN is getting all bent out of shape because of the truth. Hell even here on the University of Alabama campus we have gotten a bunch of UAPD messages sent to all students this semester about attempted muggings and assualts of girls, only to wait a week and have them redacted by the "victim". People lie and that's just fact. Anyone will lie about anything at all, but to say that in this one area women are beyond reproach ignores fundamentals of human behavior.
[–]SQQQ 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children)
there needs to be a red pill award for these outstanding contributions to mankind.
[–]HonestyVersusPC 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago* (0 children)
The truly telling aspect of that video was the absolute disregard for men who might be victims of the behaviour mentioned by the university president. The only important people, according to the talking heads, are women.
You could even go a step further and say that the CNN talking heads were supporting a woman's right to make any rape claim she likes, whether it's actual rape or not. So what if they're false. It's only some man whose life is going to be ruined. It's an outrage against feminism that false rape claims should even be acknowledged as a phenomenon that even exists, let alone for it to be addressed.
[–]evafha -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (0 children)
You have a non-video link? Can't watch videos here at work.
[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 4 years ago (0 children)
CNN = Communist news network = liberal political correctness jacked up to maximum levels.
[–]scamper_22 -2 points-1 points0 points 4 years ago (2 children)
Watch the video. This guy is pretty clueless to be speaking like that. It does call out women as liars and to do that at public event is pretty socially retarded.
Truth be told, you can't really say they were 'lying' unless you have video evidence of the entire thing.
What can be said:
It is hard to do justice in these kinds of cases.
Consent is vague; depends on each person's mindstate.
Why place blame on man when both are drunk.
Must adhere to principle of innocent until proven guilty.
Alcohol consumption must be planned for... like drinking and driving.
[–]ITHOUGHTYOUMENTWEAST 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago* (1 child)
You can for sure tell if they are lying without video evidence. A post by a rape support worker or whatever that is called was talking about the numerous number of bullshit stories that were obviously fabricated that they had to put up with. Really what many people here are complaining about is more about the evidence required for rape cases, rather than the chance that women are lying about them.
You don't go about this by asking if it was a lie or not, you simply have a standard of evidence, and try to meet that standard. Any hint of falshood is just icing on the cake.
[–]scamper_22 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children)
I agree, but that was not his tone, which is very important for a public speaker of an institution. That was my point.
I know what people are complaining about here, and I fully agree. All I said was that this guy showed poor judgment in his comments.
Suppose I go to a bar and I'm a bit tipsy and I just get into some funny verbal stuff with some guy even a little pushing. I don't think it is going to amount to much. But he escalates it and next thing you know, I'm being punched and kicked and stabbed... and I end up in the hospital.
Now, in my little world, I can think I was a victim. It should have never went that far. From an outside objective point of view, who knows. All they would see is two drunk guys getting into it and a fight and one of them ended up badly. It's shitty, but it takes a lot to actually classify one as a victim and one as the aggressor.
This is similar to how these grey area sexual assault cases are. A woman might in her head genuinely think she was a victim, but there is no way we can really ascertain anything from a legal point of view.
The advice given to this bar fighting guy would be:
1. Don't drink so much
2. Don't get into it with guys, stay away from any talk of violence
The same should be said of women.
But to make the 'big issue' about lying or making up stories is just creating needless controversy about who said he said/she said in this hearsay cases. Very hard and pointless.
[–]roskybosky -2 points-1 points0 points 4 years ago (1 child)
Why would you have to call 'morning-after regret' anything? Why would anyone call it rape? Are we all the star of a reality show or something, as if we are all being watched?
We've all had those "Holy cow, did I sleep with that?!" moments, but why on earth would anyone publicize it more with a rape accusation? Just go home.
I find it hard to believe this actually happens. Probably the man is expecting sex and strongarms the woman into it thinking it's consensual-he's surprised that she calls it rape.
[+]Masonjarteadrinker2 comment score below threshold-8 points-7 points-6 points 4 years ago (0 children)
That was a stupid comment coming from him, he's gonna lose his job because of it.