Kavanaugh Can Join Thomas.

[RoadRunner79]

Not to defend RR, but the way I read that post of his was more a dig at how we, as atheists, don't take personal testimony of God as evidence but take this personal testimony of this woman as evidence, than as a dig at Ford.  It was a dig at atheists.  Wrongly, he's misrepresenting the entire argument over personal testimony, but that's besides the point.

Not that I think he's being reasonable on the issue, just saying what I read into that comment.

As far as RR reply that Joods is making it a woman vs man thing, you have to be able to get into someone else's headspace to understand what is happening in this conversation.  Not just between RR and joods, but on a national level.

It has become apparent that, in fact, people who make sesual assault claims are far more likely to be punished in some way (not legally, but by society at large), than the person they are accusing.  It so happens that most victims are women.  It also so happens that most people getting away with assault are men.  It also so happens that some people, more than you might realize, have personal experience of being abused by a man, and might become more emotionally invested in a story of a women getting death threats for making an accusation, while the man who might indeed be an attempted rapist, becomes a Supreme Court Justice.

Brock Turner was caught in the act of violating a woman. There was no doubt of his guilt.  Still, there was more concern shown for ruining his life with punishment for his crime than there was for the life he had damaged by committing the crime.

I know many folks don't believe in micro-aggressions, but if someone has been injured, or is close to someone who has, or has simply repeatedly watched victims get the shaft while known assaulters walk away nearly unscathed, then every word you say in even mild defense or dismissal of the people or culture that leads to that harmful behavior will hurt that person.

Yeah, you might get an unwarranted amount of anger because you are a man.  That is because you are using very careful waffling language, instead of outright condemning the behavior.  Note that no one is attacking the males in the thread that outright condemning, only those that are hemming and hawing, and therefore supporting rape culture.

I probably shouldn't be in this thread, but I felt that there is a certain disregard for the sheer volume of this behavior, and how that affects people's responses to it.

I have condemned those who are shaming the woman, based on little information.   I condemn those who instantly dismiss her as lying.  I think that she should be given opportunity to be heard, if she desires, and feel safe doing so.   I also think that for the one accused should be afforded the same.  Due process, and innocent until proven guilty seem to be legal terms apt to the situation.  I have said similar and nothing otherwise.  I don't think that this woman should be getting death threats, nor do I think that Kavenaugh and his family should either.  It's possible that she is telling the truth, it's possible that she has mistaken some things, and it is possible that the accused is telling the truth as well and is being railroaded for political purposes.  And I'm mostly waffeling, because when corrected, the poster just twists my words more, interjects their own narrative, and calls me a liar.  Under such circumstances, I don't feel compelled to add more for them to dismiss and distort.

How do you think that I am misrepresenting the arguments over personal testimony?  It seems that many do not consider testimony as evidence, in any circumstance.   If that is true, then this particular case is over before it began.  Is testimony evidence?   Is it only evidence when it supports what you want or already believe?  In any case, if one is consistent in their reasoning the same would apply here.... right?