Powerful article by Laurie Penny, "Without Our Consent".
newstatesman.com
> When does authority become abuse? Who is the law supposed to protect? Is it supposed to protect women from violence, or men from consequences? The answers to these questions burrow to the heart of what is becoming a referendum not just on young men, nor masculinity as a whole, but on the nature of justice itself.
Thoughts?
Other urls found in this thread:
newswise.com
psychologytoday.com
en.wikipedia.org
city-journal.org
hellogiggles.com
twitter.com
>Why can't we throw people in jail for being on the wrong side of a hashtag campaign
Whatever, fag.
Sooooo, we should form an SS and start disappearing people from society based on crimes they may or may not have committed and then force them to prove their innocence?
I don't believe women about anything, faggot.
That's what Americans want. Their mass public always lean to totalitarian whenever they get a chance.
Ordinary Americans DO NOT want freedom, and don't care about each other. Your SS squad can disappear anyone you want, he wouldn't do a thing as long as not on him.
We call these creatures uncivilised, they're just chinks in western world, many similarities can be found in both.
This is , quite literally, what they want.
All Jews are guilty of abandoning the true God and instead serving the demiurge.
All Jews must be rounded up and expelled from this earth solely for the protection of the peoples of earth.
Laurie Penny is Jewish
Oh please, tell me more about what ordinary Americans want from the other side of the world. As it is, the cosmopolitan class IN AMERICA knows fuck all about ordinary Americans, but you somehow have it all figured out.
I don't agree 100% with Ms. Penny's article but you guys are mischaracterizing what she said. She isn't calling for automatic convictions or imprisonment without trial. She is just questioning who is really served by the "presumption of innocence", and suggesting that it may be used by predators at the expense of millions of women. It's worth considering and discussing without jumping to hyperbole.
But only for white men
More like the presumption of innocence saves millions upon millions of black and latino men from being crucified by a system set up to privilege and benefit white women.
>Time to rethink the presumption of innocence?
Not with a 5-4 (soon to be 6-3 when ginsburg dies) supreme court. lol
Nope, she is an atheist with Irish, Maltese, and Jewish ancestry. But none of that really matters. Her points are either correct or not, despite where her parents come from.
Can we not then presume the guilt of lying upon the accuser? Why do they get the presumption of innocence? It's just a matter of who cries first, wins?
>Who is the law supposed to protect? Is it supposed to protect women from violence, or men from consequences?
Neither. It's to protect the citizenry from the power of the state. THAT power imbalance is the greatest one in history, and will always be the greatest one in history. Far greater than any imbalance between men and women, or whites and minorities.
/thread
Psychologists are sick and twisted monsters.
Psychologists use tricks to suck money out of people.
Psychology is a left-wing political pressure group that pretends it is an academic field.
psychology and cognitive science are leftist political pressure groups
these groups have no business pretending they are either independent impartial or unbiased
institutions such as public universities divert taxpayer dollars to these leftist political pressure groups and thereby undermine the moral authority of academia
>an atheist with jewish ancestry
really makes me think
I'm sure most black and latino men would disagree with you about being "protected" by the system.
Damn, that's a good point. I didn't think about that.
> protect women from violence
the left thinks the cycle of life is violence
this is how fucked up and twisted they are
they literally confuse life with death
If false claims were anything near as common as sexual assault, and if they were disproportionately used to maintain the power of one group over another, then you may have a point.
She is just questioning who is really served by the "presumption of innocence", and suggesting that it may be used by predators at the expense of millions of women.
So what? This is like the arguments for getting rid of the second amendment except even weaker. How many women have to get assaulted before we destroy Common Law? All of them.
rape is not violence
rape is the cycle of life
when I seduce a woman I am raping her
I am practicing at the cycle of life
there is no reality to consent
there is reality to the cycle of life
>The presumption of innocence is also being abused by witches to protect them from the ramifications of thier evil acts against millions of Christians
If women can't handle the fact that thier safety is thier own responsibility, and that when shit happens murders, rapists and thieves are going to be getting legal protections, then they need to unironically stop trying to be men and go back to being mothers and housewives.
this.
I didn't read the article because it was long af but I think it would be hard top argue that the opposite would be a better system, at all.
the cycle of life is painful and uncomfortable
this is a biological reality
just because the cycle of life is painful and uncomfortable does not mean violence is occurring when a man rapes you
rape is life
rape is not violence
No presumption of innocence was a tactic used by the Holy Inquisition. For a self proclaimed atheist to not understand how many people were burned at the stake because of no presumption of innocence is alarming.
>Excuse me Mr. Blackman, how do you feel about being punished for crimes without any evidence?
"Well that's pretty bad, seems like the whole reason we had Black Lives Matter was because black men were being punished, often with their lives, just based on the suspicions of police."
>How would you like to be arrested and go to jail based on accusations made from thin air without any evidence.
"No sir I don't like that one bit."
the issue of protection is totally irrelevant
women do not need to be protected from the cycle of life
women are demanding that the streets be filled with violent niggers so they can say there is violence in the cycle of life
the solution is to kick the niggers out of the USA
>Neither. It's to protect the citizenry from the power of the state.
Ms. Penny addresses this point quite effectively, quoting Judith Herman:
>"'The legal system,' as Herman observes, 'is designed to protect men from the superior power of the state but not to protect women or children from the superior power of men. It therefore provides strong guarantees for the rights of the accused but essentially no guarantees for the rights of the victim.'”
A hashtag campaign rooted in credible accusations shouldn't just be ignored. But I guess you think predators should walk free after they get enough notoriety?
>but not to protect women or children from the superior power of men
So she admits women are inferior to men?
This sounds like formulaic pilpul to me
But women are equal under the law, and children are even more protected.
Men bear the brunt of the legal system more than women or children.
She's just a cunt who's buttmad that a spurious accusation didn't sink Kavanaugh.
> Is it supposed to protect women from violence, or men from consequences?
the women who think there is violence in the cycle of life are mistaken
we need to stop pretending that rape is violence
the muscle spasms of an ejaculating penis are not violence
they are natural
>another jew
what are the odds?
I think what she is saying is that the legal system should stop protecting honest people from liars. Who lies more than women and children? They can barely tell fantasy from reality.
>How many women have to get assaulted before we destroy Common Law? All of them.
Lol so you would be okay with every single woman being raped just to protect some tiny minority of those falsely accused?
>Lol so you would be okay with every single woman being raped just to protect some tiny minority of those falsely accused?
Is a false dichotomy and a logical fallacy
>"lol so" followed by an absurd absolute
*snap*
Yep
That's going in my cognitive dissonance compilation.
>Time to rethink the presumption of innocence?
The only way that logical result of that policy would be:
1: Imprison everybody.
2: People get to try and prove innocence to earn release.
I would propose a pilot program, where we lock up a selected number of leftist who think this is a good system, and see how it works -- perhaps they can prove it's a good idea, or perhaps the experience will help them learn something. Either way is good.
Nobody is suggesting we do away with ALL legal protections for the accused. Just that we should consider whether some of them should be updated to address the reality on the ground.
What "updates" hmm? What "reality on the ground" were you talking about, Chaim?
but you just suggested that if we don't update some legal protection, all women would be raped by pack of niggers. seeYou are performing mental gymanstics from one post to the next
HORSING AROUND WITH GIRLS IS NOT VIOLENCE
horsing around with girls is playing at the cycle of life and possibly sexually stimulating porn, if someone has a camera ready
AS AN AMERICAN YOU HAVE AN IRONCLAD RIGHT TO MAKE AS MUCH PORN AS YOU WANT IT IS CALLED THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
helping girls get over anxiety surrounding the cycle of life is not violence
Exactly, men of color are already getting completely fucked over by the system. All of our romanticized procedural protections really only work on behalf of those who already have power in society.
I admire your effort to play devil's advocate, but there has to come a point where you can't keep pretending you're on Team I AM SILLY
If you assume that a woman's life crumbles when some teenager tries to steal her a kiss, you must also assume that a woman is not fit to live in the society of adult people, but she should taken care of by her husband or relatives.
They are, but you don't hear about them. False claims largely come from women in the forms of divorce litigation. I can't tell you how many horror stories I've heard of the things women lie about when I worked in a divorce lawyers office. The woman almost always lies to get what they want, even when they are not suitable to be the custodial parent.
That is why the presumption of innocence is so important. The benefits greatly outweigh "muh rape story"
>women do not need to be protected from the cycle of life
You think rape is part of the cycle of life?
TIME TO THROW COMMIES OUT OF HELICOPTERS
>Men of color do not have the presumption of innocence
>So we should do away with the presumption of innocence
Fuck you, Herschel
A risk of violence, including rape, certainly is.
>So she admits women are inferior to men?
Yes, that's the whole point of her article. Our legal system and social order all work to make women subservient to men.
Is this your first run in with feminist ideas?
CHRISTINE BLASEY FORD
THE CYCLE OF LIFE IS PAINFUL AND UNCOMFORTABLE
YOU ARE A WOMAN
BEING A WOMAN MEANS PUTTING UP WITH THE CYCLE OF LIFE
CHRISTINE BLASEY FORD PUT UP WITH THE CYCLE OF LIFE
The innocent are served by presumption of innocence and protected from mob mentality which is incredibly easy to manipulate now with social media.
Somebody already addressed why does SHE get presumption of innocence.truthfulness, but not HIM, so I'll skim past that one.
So skipping ahead, it is cute that Miss Penny thinks she is having a deep new thought about OMG SOMETIMES THE GUILTY ESCAPE JUSTICE IF THERE IS A PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE!!!! This insight is neither new nor original. However, it has long been assumed that it is preferable to allow some number of the guilty to escape than to punish some number of the innocent. Were Miss Penny to stop by the house handing out #MeToo literature, I'd ask her what number of innocent people she would think it is acceptable to imprison under a new system.
>Our legal system and social order all work to make women subservient to men.
Give me a simple example.
The argument of "they exist, you just don't hear about them" is complete and utter horseshit and you know it.
>But women are equal under the law, and children are even more protected.
Women ostensibly get the same procedural protections against men. But here's the thing - they hardly ever need those protections because they are rarely the perpetrators of violence in society.
It's like how the law "equally" forbids the rich and the poor from begging in the streets.
>Women deserve their own legal system
But what is a woman?
Except when it comes to children, divorce, rape claims, sexism claims, racism claims...Nice try, buddy.
>we need to stop pretending that rape is violence
>the muscle spasms of an ejaculating penis are not violence
Ok, so when some guy spasms his jizz into your ass against your will I guess you will just laugh it off and call it the cycle of life.
>I'm sure most black and latino men would disagree with you about being "protected" by the system.
They should read up on the history of lynching, and similar fun that resulted from mobs presuming guilt in the absence of evidence.
I would not want to get caught up in the justice system if I was an innocent black or latino -- but I'd prefer taking my chances with the current system to being invited to a necktie party by Judge Lynch.
>deliberately substituting 'inferior' for 'subservient' and thinking nobody here will notice the verbal sleight-of-hand
You must be new. Answer the question as stated, please.
>laurie penny
The guy said "all of them". Hyperbole deserves hyperbole.
user I replied to said "all of them".
>Laurie Penny
Oh brother. Not her again.
If your concern is really based on wanting to get better justice for victims of such assault, I wonder of you'd consider spending a few hours thinking of how that might be done without throwing the innocent to the wolves.
>what is becoming a referendum
Actually no it's not. It's a social media campaign drummed up by feminists and liberals based on partisan politics and ideology. There is no referendum despite what degenerate cunts like you and Penny want to believe. You create the delusion that assumption of innocence is up for debate. It's not. Where? Outside of your social media bubble and feminist hothouses? Where exactly is this occurring?
You're just pissed because the word of a women is not taken as divine fiat and that Trump nominated a conservative. Please. Let's not try to make this into some serious intellectual debate.
Now fuck off cunt. Penny's words are nothing and you are nothing. Not even worthy of rape.
"Update" of not holding the presumption of innocence as an ironclad rule for certain cases.
The whole premise of the article is based on the fact she is scared to accuse a sitting judge now justice of the Supreme Court of a crime due to fear of retaliation from powerful people in politics. My question is why the fuck did she not accuse him of rape when he was still a nobody without powerful friends.
Because it’s fake, that’s why.
I didn't say anything about black people, nice attempt to put words in my mouth tho
It's not silliness. There are a lot of countries that don't offer the extreme procedural protections the U.S. does and not all of them are totalitarian shitholes.
Women are superior under the law. They have the right to vote at 18
I have a friend in prosecution who says that divorce court is far more acrimonious and unpleasant than criminal court
>If false claims were anything near as common as sexual assault
Perhaps give some of the statistics here-in a bit of thought:||
city-journal.org
Most relevantly:
"In 1985, Ms. magazine published a study by psychologist Mary Koss that gave rise to the statistic that one in four college females would be sexually assaulted during college. The study also found that 42 percent of putative rape victims went on to have intercourse again with their alleged assailant—a behavior inconceivable in the case of actual rape. In fact, it was the researcher herself who classified the subjects as victims; 73 percent of the women whom the researcher designated as rape survivors said that they hadn’t been raped, when asked directly."
In a witch-hunt atmosphere, some people will cry "Witch!" whether there are really witches of not.
That's not my argument and you know it. I'm just saying its dishonest to claim that we need the presumption of innocence to protect men of color when it has never protected them before.
So the cases, carefully selected, will be such that people will have to prove their innocence.
I don't think even reddit will take you.
The guilty are also served by the presumption of innocence, and social media can just as easily be used to sling mud on a survivor.
This is absolutely untrue. Women physically assault men far more often than men physically assault women; society thinks the former is cute while the latter is abhorrent. Also less likely to be reported by men because of embarrassment.
If women want to be equal they should get used to being knocked the fuck out if they put their hands on anyone without bitching about it after the fact.
Like what? Where should we force people to prove there innocence when accused without any corroboration or evidence?
No one is working to make women subservient. Women are naturally inferior and therefore NEED men to protect them. If the writer could admit that the equality meme is just that- a meme- maybe we could make some progress.
It certainly has you deceptive sheckler.
>some of them should be updated to address the reality
Sorry, but you (and these harpies) will NEVER get enough support to repeal/alter/replace the 4th, 5th, and 6th Amendments all in one fell swoop. Especially with "arguments" this pathetic and poorly-timed.
Just one? Here's 10.
hellogiggles.com
But niggers committ more rapes than any other race. Have you not studied FBI crime statistics?
>I think it would be hard top argue that the opposite would be a better system, at all.
I'd agree -- if for no other reason, remembering that precedent, once establish, tends to spread around.
>If women get to lay aside presumption of innocence, why don't black folks in cases of alleged racial violence?
>Why not protestors who say the other side shoved them?
>Why doesn't everyone who claims to be a crime victim get to do that? Fair's fair, right?
where this is ultimately going is that we will all be so fearful of being falsely accused of a crime that we will willingly surrender ourselves to constant surveillance in order to protect ourselves. We will all rush out and buy the ieye that will promise to record and upload every moment of our lives to our "safe" storage so that in the event of an accusation an accuser's record will have to match the accused's, what a wonderful world it will be
>She is just questioning who is really served by the "presumption of innocence"
The accused. It's not rocket science.
I would dispute some of those, but I think it's more important to point out that just because women get small advantages in 1 or 2 areas doesn't mean the system overall isn't working against them.
Either that or
>gas the kikes
>you would be okay with every single woman being raped just to protect some tiny minority of those falsely accused?
If/when that happens, we can talk about it.
Now, back to the real world...
Yeah I'm sure that's how they thought of it when they scrapped it for the Salem Witch Trials...
>not understanding that being "subservient" inherently means being in an "inferior" position
Fine. I can't answer for Ms. Penny, but I will readily admit that women are generally inferior to men in upper body strength.