And it continues...
Wait, just one more, sorry. No I don't have a problem with women Bells, and never have. Even with the time many years ago, when I wore a younger man's clothes, and got slapped on the arse by some Blonde
. And the couple of times I was happily seduced by sheilas that I fancied anyway.
Again, there's at least one other guy here who seems to think that because a woman has agreed to have sex with him, that somehow proves he isn't a sexist, a misogynist or a chauvinist. Hint: having sex doesn't mean you don't have problems with women.
And really, nobody here needs to hear about your sexual exploits or your conquests over the little women.
Alleged criminals? The first case I highlighted, the woman admitted she was lying...Alleged criminals?
I think that might be a slip on Bell's part. In the case you refer to, the woman pleaded guilty to a crime, so she is a convicted criminal (although I don't think she has been sentenced yet). In the second case, as far as I am aware, the woman concerned has not even been charged with a crime. But perhaps you know differently?
In Australia, as you may be aware, people are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Until conviction, an accused criminal is "alleged". Listen to how news reporters describe such people. You will hear the word "alleged" a lot.
Does your "alleged criminals"also apply to "Dolly" Robert Dunn??
That was a man - a priest who abused children. I don't know much about him. Was he charged/convicted?
If it was as simple as lying, you would have a point. Obviously it isn't, and obviously you don't. How about for once in your life, look at the effects the lying by these bitches, had on their victims.
Ask your wife whether she approves of your referring to women as "bitches". Ask her what kind of men typically do that.
It obviously is only a small percentage that do lie, but that again does not detract from the evil that the lying by these woman caused...Loss of job, broken marriage, income etc etc.
Perhaps if some arsehole woman, accused your husband of similar, you may be more sympathetic. I hope he and you never have to face such evil intent.
Here's the thing, paddoboy. You didn't start this thread to give sympathy to the male victims. You started this thread to bash their female accusers. Your focus is on the "bitches", the "lowlife" women, the "connivers".
You accuse Bells and myself of lacking sympathy for the male victims. You haven't asked us what we feel for them. You're assuming we're unsympathetic for some reason. Why is that? Is it because if we're not with you in your crusade against the women, we must be against these men?
The two cases are quite different, and I don't even think you realise it. From the news reports - which is all I have to go on - the "good samaritan" case most likely involves a mentally-disturbed woman falsely accusing an entirely innocent man. The Jarratt case, on the other hand, involves a decades-old sexual encounter that both parties agreed took place, and the argument was over whether the encounter was consensual or not. A court decided that the allegation that it was not consensual was not proven in that case.
If you want to know how I feel about the men, here's how I feel. Regarding the good samaritan - I feel sorry for the guy who was falsely accused. He clearly did nothing to deserve what happened to him (regarding the allegation of rape). Regarding John Jarratt, I don't know what actually happened with him, but clearly the court had more information in front of it than I do. I
suspect that what happened there was a consensual sexual encounter that both parties later came to regret.
Possibly the woman concerned came later to view the encounter as non-consensual. But this is all speculation on my part, and I could be very wrong. I think that the outcome of the trial, i.e. Jarratt's acquittal, was most likely the right one in terms of the application of the law. I'd
like to think that Jarratt was innocent, but I don't know. From what I've seen of him, he seems like an okay guy, but I don't know him.
Yet such lying could see an innocent man sent to prison...
And other lying can see guilty men go free.
We appreciate that the criminal justice system is far from perfect. But how do you plan to solve the problem? Assume that woman accusers are always lying, unless there is clear evidence that they are not? Send accusers to prison if a court finds them unproven?
Perhaps the differences between you and me, and what I believe to be the general opinion, is that I genuinley support the woman's right movement, and the elimination of such examples as put by wegs...or in other words women's equality, not women's superiority as pushed by some extremist Femiinazis.
Now we get to it. Women's rights are all well and good, until they go too far. Then, the women become evil "feminazis" and must be put back in their rightful place. Wouldn't want the little women getting above their station, would we? Everybody is equal, but men are more equal than women (apologies to Orwell).
I discredit any person, male or female that indulges in sexual assault, and/or purposely lies about it, knowing what it could mean. If that offends your sensibilities, then tough titty!
I haven't seen you starting any threads railing against false male accusers. It's only the women you seem to have a problem with.
Or perhaps you are still fuming re my suggestion that a wolf whistle is not sexual assault?
That's another topic, but briefly: if a wolf whistle puts somebody in fear of potential bodily harm, then it is an assault.
I'm not sure whether you're endorsing the men who harass women in the street. If you are, then shame on you. But that's a discussion for a different thread.
The emotional crap in your posts in this thread, and your lying re your efforts in trying to paint me as some sort of chauvinist.
Ignoring some of more of your boring inuendo and crap.....
Well done, paddoboy. Tell the woman how she is posting "emotional crap", because women are irrational and emotional, as all good men know. Also tell her that she is "boring" and that she is a liar. Take her down a peg or two. She's getting too hoity and needs to be put in her place. What a great thread you've chosen to attack a women in! Way to show your true colours!
And with regards to my virility Bells, actually quite adequate for an old bastard, and no need to take any of the little blue pills as yet.
Why on earth do you think you need to tell women about your virility in this thread? How is it relevant? Who cares if your penis works or not? We know you're a man. You don't have to wave your penis around.
Some advice: you might want to quit this appalling excuse for a thread now, rather than dig an even deeper hole for yourself. Totally up to you, of course.
