In order to doubt Emma's account about what happened to HER body, you have to move beyond the realm of plausible deniability and doubt into a realm of KNOWING or positing that she is conniving, ruthless, or resolutely unaware of her own existence and person-- crazy. You have to lay those down as claims, or at least as possibilities about her, WITHOUT knowing her at all. Not only that, you have to KNOW or at least believe the same things about the two other women who accused him of similar things.

Ask yourself why you doubt women who tell you what happened to their bodies but you don't doubt the men who deny doing what the woman said he did?

And guess what? Even if a woman is conniving, ruthless or totally out of it mentally, if she didn't give consent, it's sexual assault. That's it. That's the definition of sexual assault--- sexual contact without consent is assault. Stop fighting that definition just because it implicates many of us. Deal with the reality that is and instead of fighting remorse, accept it and fight back against the society that taught you it's OK to live without regard for consent. Stop bringing up texts that show she liked the man. She probably did like him; it does not matter. She could be married to him and sexual assault is still sexual assault. There is no room for obfuscation.

And EVEN if you think it's just all a big misunderstanding, you don't think that if a man misunderstands consent to the point that he does this 2 other times to 2 other women, he needs to be made to understand? You can't fight on campus because of a "misunderstanding" and plagiarize in college cuz of "misunderstanding" and not get sectioned or expelled, let alone do it THREE times and still graduate?! How in God's holy name can we honestly treat sexual assault less seriously than fighting or plagiarizing?

For Lee Bolinger, after all he's done in the fight for Affirmative Action, to act like this toward this young woman,a warrior, is disgusting and despicable

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2885049&forum_id=2#27929522)

Stopped reading. Too painful already.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2885049&forum_id=2#27929548)

"Give it up; she's not gonna let you fuck her, you white-knighting faggot."

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2885049&forum_id=2#27929539)

but maybe he'll get a shot jizzing on her sister Olivia Sulkowicz @ NYU

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2885049&forum_id=2#27929968)

You're talking about the Daily Beast article with a bunch of typos and no original evidence, and the fact that TEXTS that show that she liked the dude and invited him to have sex with her initially but can in no way prove that the nature of the sexual activity did not change to something to which she did not consent? You're dismissed, big dog.

---

Everyone reads the texts and facebook convo and then ignores the part where she tells you what its like to be victimized by someone you initially trusted.

---

And all of the arguments about the "doubt" are ridiculous.

Like because she knows the other accusers at this relatively small school, it must be a conspiracy. Because she talked to him after, she must be making it up. There are people who are abused by FAMILY members who have to keep living with them. You could remain married to your husband and that doesn't mean dude didn't assault you.

Don't people think before they speak?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2885049&forum_id=2#27929573)

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-SSUx_TlRrn0/VP211m0szhI/AAAAAAAAAGw/cNhcZBlP_08/s1600/Cartoon18.jpg

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-_bqDa8IVfto/VP8RWii9S3I/AAAAAAAAAHk/f3a--zE_nkU/s1600/Cartoon21.jpg

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2885049&forum_id=2#27929598)

I can't even wrap my head around what he's trying to argue here.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2885049&forum_id=2#27929672)

"do I still have your consent to go missionary style?"

"Do I still have your consent to go doggy"

ljl when I get a girl I usually physically throw them onto my bed and act like a fucking man and fuck them.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2885049&forum_id=2#27929692)

I read the texts. Texting something is not consent in the moment. No one has proved that she lied or used it as a weapon so it's you, not me jumping to conclusions.

Rape is common. False accusations are rare. So why are you jumping to a conclusion that she's lying and using it as a weapon? You scared of some things you've done in the past? Invested in a climate that makes coming forward impossible?

What are you running from? Why so biased? I dont understand yoru stance at all. You can't take a woman at her word about what happened to her because thats jumping to conclusions but you can automatically, without any evidence to prove it, assume that she's lying and using the accusation as a weapon.

Also, the court never ruled. She only complained via school discipline code. So, it's you, little boy, not me who needs to read the facts. But you've overstayed the welcome of your pathetic attempts at reason. Good day, son.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2885049&forum_id=2#27929584)

I'm just trying to get context around why you're taking the illogical and hypocritical position pertaining to "jumping to conclusions" that you are.

I'm only asking because if you don't know the definition of consent or sexual assault and you think someone texting something is tacit consent for all occasions going forward in the future maybe you have a personal investment in the permanent silencing of victims.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2885049&forum_id=2#27929586)

I ask the question because if you don't know the definition of consent or sexual assault and if you think someone texting someone means they consent to anything that happens in the bed room, I actually think you might be a danger and a threat to a woman. It's clear.

Someone who says "if you disrespect me, I will shoot you" is literally a threat to people's safety and I think this is very similar. You don't even demonstrate a clear line of reasoning outside of your argument that a woman who texts a man naturally and tacitly consents to everything that he does to her. That's actually a frightening argument.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2885049&forum_id=2#27929587)

Notice, I never said anything about the guy she identified. Likewise, you have NO right to disparage her or to cast aspersions on her. In that context, I think I was as nice and friendly as someone should have been to you. Now take your feelings somewhere and go think about what really matters: human suffering. Good day.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2885049&forum_id=2#27929603)

If you're that averse to someone pushing back against you and being annoyed by your faulty logic then you need to stay up off my Facebook point blank period. But when you come around here, you don't use shame as a rhetorical weapon, you don't bring sexist assumptions and you don't get away with hypocritical inconsistency while doing so.

You are dealt with on the merits of your reason, not simply your "respectful" intonation of a fundamentally disrespectful argument about how she wanted someone to "fuck her in the ass". You don't get to employ that against her to degrade her and then complain that someone is being mean to you.

If you want to get away with that tact, then make yourself a Facebook status. And guess what, I wont even write a single word in reply. You came to me and you came foul in my eyes, so you get bounced.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2885049&forum_id=2#27929614)

But the same doesn't apply to the accused even though there is literally no evidence against him (and even evidence to support his claims), right?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2885049&forum_id=2#27930041)

I will explain, because I used to think like you, in part because I was living in a way that was disrespectful of other people's space and privacy and living out what I thought it meant to be a man. I had to actually reflect on situations I was in, read, listen to people and challenge my assumptions to get away from instincts that were telling me to assume that a girl dancing with me means she wants me to put my hands everywhere, or that a girl giving you a number means she wants you to blow her phone up, or that because a girl makes out with you she wants to be groped or that because a girl is down to have sex once she will be cool having it again no matter the situation. That thinking is dangerous but I used to have that thinking even in thinking about other guys situations or when hearing women speak.

But imagine people touching you without your permission. All over your body. No one speaks up. No one cares. People blame you because you froze and didn't say anything right away. I actually had a dude touch me on the train accidentally but still without regard for my space at all because he wanted to move me to make space. He essentially groped me. and although I'm a trained hand to hand combatant, I froze at first and the train went to the next stop before I addressed him. I can't imagine what someone smaller and less physical would be able to do to speak up for themselves.

Imagine not being able to go to a party a turn up without being worried someone would take advantage. I got black out drunk last year for the first time ever and my roomie took me home and my friend danielle checked on me. I only remember leaving the club and arguign with a bouncer and hitting on a woman on the way out..... I was SMASHED and was still hitting on a woman,. On top of the world. Had something happened to me, folks would have been livid. If i got robbed, the cops would have believed me. IF I got beat up and the person was identified, charges would be presssed. If I was a woman though, peopel would blame me for drinking too much.

Just because you text someone or like someone and even hang out with them once or have sex with them twice doesnt mean its cool to force or impose yourself on someone. Because we live in a society and culture that blames women who we KNOW were raped via evidence because of their clothes or having flirted with that person or had sex with them before, it's sexist to be quick to judge a woman while saying we should be slow to judge a man. Its sexist to be able to empathize with a man who is accused of sex assault but nto be able to empathize with a woman and to not consider that dynamic in your own argument.

Multiple survivors addressed you here bravely and courageously with riveting and heart breaking accounts of not only what happened to them but how they were talked to after and how they were treated and you dismissed those as "their experiences". Nah dude. This is OUR experience. Cuz this is OUR culture where people can't feel safe in a bar or cant feel safe hanging out alone with a classmate or cant feel safe when their boyfriend is drunk.

Its not cool, man. We can change this culture. We can change the way we look at consent and assault and we have to treeat victims as if that was us. Enough of us have disrespected women or verbally abused women or worse that we have this messed up initial instinct to empathize with men, we need to work hard to put ourselves in the shoes of someone who was taken advantage of and then silenced and we need to work even harder to make sure we are not reinforcing that silence by drowing people in an overwehlming sea of doubt.

In our society, doubting and shaming women is like the tide in an ocean. You can't just raise the tide in one place and say you're just looking at facts. When you shame or doubt a woman without having any real evidence (texts sent way later are not evidence), you are doing that on the account of her being a woman because we never deal with men that way, and thus you're doing that to women everywhere, in all cases. Think about it. Challenge yourself. It's not an easy conversation for anyone, but it shouldnt be a conversation made impossible by the fear of men.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2885049&forum_id=2#27929615)

"Umm. [name], you are the definition of a trigger and I hope you think long and hard about what you've said here and delete your own comments. (just a tip from me, cause obviously this isn't my status or anything)"

WHY IS TRIGGER A REAL THING WTF

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2885049&forum_id=2#27929594)

"I am going to fuck you till you love me, faggot"

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2885049&forum_id=2#27929646)

I will post shrews leg pics in exchange

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2885049&forum_id=2#27929663)

"Oh my god, once again, you are literally a walking trigger and are being so offensive and are acting dumb to the point where you almost seem like you don't get it? But you MUST get it because it is so simple. However, you clearly don't want to get it because all of this "new information" would mean you would actually hve to hold yourself accountable for your abhorrent and probably very rapey behaviors?"

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2885049&forum_id=2#27929726)

I find these people hilarious

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2885049&forum_id=2#27929762)

it's all so outrageous that I refuse to believe the general population will ever swallow this shit

I'm still convinced this is merely a loud fringe

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2885049&forum_id=2#27929778)

SWJ will incorporate economic agenda of $5000 a month minimum income for everyone or something like that. Then in order to provide that, sweeping social changes will need to be implemented. Only formerly oppressed will be able to hold political office, etc. Enter Zimbabwe USA

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2885049&forum_id=2#27929853)

"This is why ISIS is winning, bitchmade faggots like you."

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2885049&forum_id=2#27929628)

"people like you is why God does not talk to us anymore"

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2885049&forum_id=2#27929638)

The first is that LOL at shitlibs using bullshit ONE IN FIVE statistics.

Secondly, regardless of whether or not the stat is true, its existence shouldn't govern our reaction to the specific case when we have better evidence. A statistic is just a descriptor, it doesn't make something more likely to be true in an individual case. You can't use a statistic, which is a composite figure, to analyze an individual case. I mean, there are legitimate ways to do it, but not the way they are.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2885049&forum_id=2#27929738)

http://www.oneinthreewomen.com/

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2885049&forum_id=2#27929948)

For instance: "She couldn't stop fucking her sugar daddy because he bought her a car, and it was titled in his name. If she left, he might not let her take it."

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2885049&forum_id=2#27930001)

I will admit, I regularly coerce my wife into having sex with me, by being nice to her, making her find me attractive, and making her fall in love with me and become sexually turned on

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2885049&forum_id=2#27930046)

Icing on the cake

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2885049&forum_id=2#27929656)

now his entrance music is in my head.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2885049&forum_id=2#27929690)

"Can I touch your face?"

Yes.

"Can I now kiss you"

"Every 3 seconds - are you still OK, I will STOP"

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2885049&forum_id=2#27929660)

"Pornography, unless it intentionally is designed to challenge the idea of women as sex objects or walking compositions of body parts, is rape culture and is definitiely 100% degrading to women."

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2885049&forum_id=2#27929728)

"--Rev. Dr. Jerry Falwell, founder of the Thomas Road Baptist Church and Liberty University, during his lawsuit with Hustler Magazine"

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2885049&forum_id=2#27929747)

"It's not an insult to ask a question. It's also not a good look to use the word "monkey" when talking to me."

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2885049&forum_id=2#27929906)

I have this strong feeling he is a bizarre mix with at most 50% black DNA

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2885049&forum_id=2#27929918)

We need to strongly focus on the presumption of innocence and the fact she needs to prove her allegations. Rather than saying she lied (lets be honest even though we might think so we cant prove that either) which ties us down with rhetoric about rape victims etc just tell these idiots that you have an open mind and want to believe her but in any trial she has the burden of proof

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2885049&forum_id=2#27929764)

Do I think she is full of shit. Of course and I dont believe her but trying to argue with the followup texts with ultra shitlib SJWs is counter productive. We need to hammer on the fact that she has nothing to support what she says and we cant convict/punish somebody based on an allegation 12 months later

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2885049&forum_id=2#27929845)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2885049&forum_id=2#27929894)

Again any reasonable person will construe these followup texts as an evidence that supports Paul's version. If I was in a jury or student panel I would conclude the same

The point I am making is that to approach these arguments with ultra shitlib SJWs by bringing up these friendly non-specific texts is useless and counterproductive. It falls into their survivor trauma or rape culture looking for a perfect victim dogma. You are welcome to do it but you might as well go and bash your head on a concrete wall to break through it

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2885049&forum_id=2#27929900)