EternalShinyAndChrome

I appreciate that, Tim. I have a daughter as well and wouldn't want that to happen to her either. It certainly is awful but, like I said, when I hear "he groomed me" that sounds like someone who doesn't want to examine their own choices and culpability. Too many women, IMO, have weaponized it to gain victim status, cash or attention. I understand there are lot of legitimate cases out there, but every time a woman falsely accuses a man because she doesn't want to face choices she made, it ruins it for the legitimate cases. I have a son too, and wouldn't want him to be on the end of something like that too. I can tell you with 100% confirmation that my wife knows someone who accused a man because she regretted sleeping with him. And the funny thing is, these women are never held accountable. But we always go after the man. I'm just saying there has got to be a better way of examining the situation than the one where we can't EVER question one side of the equation. Thoughts?

Good point and duly noted. I guess if I came off like a I apologize. That was not my intent but I can see how that looks now after re-reading some of my posts and thinking for a bit. I should have crafted my words better and more measured. @Engorgeous George actually encapsulated my thoughts in a much better way. I read the "he groomed me" comment in the article and that's what I went off on. I actually stopped reading after that and went, "Oh, hear we go again". When I hear that I immediately think "I partied hard last night and now regret it" because we've seen many men get falsely accused before. He very well may have committed a bunch of SA, but the fact that we can NEVER question the woman otherwise we get "you support r@pe" immediately shuts down the conversation. No one can ever ask how we got to this point because we have to 110% believe the woman OR ELSE. Thanks for responding to my post the way you did. It made me think.

Yeah, no one's disagreeing with you here but maybe address the point ("he groomed me") instead of going off on a man-hating diatribe. The reason we can't have discussions is because no one can EVER question the woman's motives or story. So when someone like me comes along and questions it, you lose your sh#t and then just jump to "You support r@pe!". THAT is what shuts down conversation, not the questioning. Let's try to have a level discussion, if you can.

Also, did it ever occur to you that maybe the reason why - nowadays - women don't come forward about sexual assault (your claim) is because enough WOMEN have made enough false allegations that they've ruined it for the actual SA and r@pe victims?

He most certainly is.

Huh? Men are ABSOLUTELY held accountable. Are you living in the 1950's? in 2025, men are ALWAYS held accountable. And once again, you seem to be NOT holding women accountable at all. Only the men. THAT is the issue. It's always the men, never the women. My issue is with the "he groomed me statement" which I explained above. I am certainly not "championing r@pe culture" as much as you're trying to push that on me. We've seen and hear enough of these "he groomed me" stories where it turns out they are fake to start questioning them. No one is saying she deserved to be SA'd - if that is, indeed, what happened - but "regret" is not the same as "he groomed me" or "he raped me". You kinda sound like a man-hater, btw. Do you EVER question a woman's motives in these situations? Or are we to #believeAllWomenNoMatterWhat?

Pretty much sums up my position as well, but you explained it better than I did.

You mean, The Biden Crime Family™.

Meh. No one is saying men should rape women or have rights to their body, but the "he groomed me" statements we always hear in these type of college situations is usually code for "I partied hard last night and regret it", which is what we usually hear when it turns out the allegations are false or have been greatly exaggerated. The dude was 22, not 52. The age gap was not one of those "he groomed me" type of situations. Certainly hold him responsible if there is more to it, but seems like some very flimsy stories. I'll see your "fock off" and raise you two "fock offs".

Next Up for the Left: Small claims liberal judge issues a nationwide injunction on all immigration deportations!

Says the "I trust Iran guy"!

She said he groomed her? Wut? He was 22 years old and she was 17. At what point are women going to take responsibility for their own actions? That's as far as I got before I stopped reading. If there was an actual physical assault then that's not great, but doesn't she bear any responsibility for putting herself in that situation? With all of the laws and PSAs and services that we provide women over the last 40 or 50 years, haven't they learned anything at all?

Hey guys. Ghey_artest read that Iran said Trump's bombing was all showmanship and did no damage so that confirms his bias. Baghdad Bob told him so!

DOJ sues the entire Federal District Court of Maryland for impeding and interfering with the exclusive powers of the Executive Branch (separation of powers) regarding immigration. This is what I voted for! #winningSoBadItHurts

Wait you think that's bigger than the Democrats electing a communist to run the largest city in America? Even Democrats are worried: https://apnews.com/article/new-york-mayor-zohran-mamdani-trump-biden-1561ca0aa1821f88b97603f00221b64f You are completely off as you usually are on this topic.

Tim "The Strawman" Hauck.

He's the racist? Not you? I think you need to stop suckling off of the far-left gloryhole propaganda c@ck and start challenging and thinking for yourself. HTH.

Wait...not only did you conveniently miss the HUGE @SS video iframe in the post, you didn't even watch it AFTER I pointed it out?

I posted the video above. Maybe you missed it?

Wait...wut? You based all that on the NYC election for mayor? One of the most liberal cities in America, if not THE most liberal? More tim wish-casting gone wild. The only thing this solidifies is how crazy the left is as it alienates more and more of its base. I think you got everything backward - this almost certainly will help Republicans in the mid-terms and in the next election. It's literally an ad that writes itself. How do you NOT see that?

Let's clear things up even further: "BLM/Antifa" are Marxists and Communists. They are "anti-Fascist" only in the sense that THEY fight against Fascists. This akin to Black Power members fighting the KKK and calling themselves "anti-racists". They are just as racist as those they claim to fight against. BLM/Antifa want their authoritarian Marxism/Communism - which is even MORE brutal - in place of this fake Fascism they claim to fight. They aren't fighting "the good fight" at all - they're fighting for power (and money) so THEY can line people up against the wall instead of the supposed "Fascists". And let's be real here: "Fascists" are anybody they disagree with, not necessarily actual Fascists.

BLM/Antifa are the modern day Brownshirts of the Democrat Party.

Or service in one of the Armed Forces for a minimum four year ACTIVE DUTY stint, with another 4 years in INACTIVE RESERVE.

As we've seen, the people who vote for these politicians and policies that destroy entire cities then move out to other places like cockroaches and destroy them to. They still vote the same. We need to prevent those people from moving and force them to live in the excrement they voted for.