Guilty if Proven Innocent.

[The_Mad_PirateParticipant 1278]

Biggvs_Dickvs wrote:

It is absolutely right.

Obviously posting a full sex vid without consent isn’t (and shouldn’t be) covered, but posting evidence of the consent, and therefore exposing state sponsored and perpetuated injustice is absolutely the express intent of the constitutional amendment the directs that “congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of the press” etc etc.

It is very specifically the case that it was intended to protect.

Except then this crazy marxist feminist will expell you for alleged “revenge porn”.

"We didn't start the fire. It was always burning. Since the world's been turning" "A world that vilifies men only breeds a generation of men that feel no empathy towards women" “In a woman’s mind , there is really no such thing as a ‘we’. In her eyes, earth allways revolves around her, not the other way around. So thinking that your needs , aspirations or desires are valid enough to be persued, or even that you are entitled achive such goals, is like asking your boss for a pay rise in your very first day at the job.”

[QuietlyquietlyParticipant 728]

Prefer Peace to Piece wrote:

Women like attention. Women like drama.
I can see a disturbed female filing false rape charges against some man just to “get even” with some fantasized slight.
I could be wrong, but I think video or audio documentation might be worth the hassle should you need to defend yourself against false accusations.
Of course, the best strategy is not to play. (better off with porn/fleshlights)

This HAS already happened: Mattress Girl. Basically, she sent him a whole bunch of sexual texts both before and after the event, all saying how good he was in bed, how she enjoyed it so much, and how she wanted more. Then she made a false allegation, the College suspended him, made his life hell, he wasn’t allowed to protest his innocence. The Police got involved, obviously, saw that she was clearly lying, and dropped all charges. She then confessed that she’d made it up because he lost interest in her. The College was notified of both of these things, but did not reinstate his place, and upheld the ban against him.

[narwhalParticipant]

I hadn’t heard that mattress girl actually confessed to lying. I thought she was still sticking to it and the masses still believed her despite lack of evidence.

Anyway, it makes no sense for illegally obtained evidence to be dismissible in court, at least when the government isn’t illegally obtaining it. If I have cameras set up in my home, I think it should be my responsibility to inform visitors that I am recording. That could be verbally or with a clearly displayed sign. at entry points. It may be illegal to record sex acts (should not), and I’d take the fine for that if need be. However it should still be permissible evidence in a rape case. If you have proof that no rape occurred and the evidence is not tainted (coerced, etc), why is not permissible. Charge me for illegal taping and charge her with false rape allegations.

And there is a difference between having a tape held privately and presented as evidence in a legal situation, versus publicly posting a sex tape.

It would be great if you could just avoid women, but you don’t even have to be in the same room with her for her to throw a rape claim at you that you can’t defend against.

Ok. Then do it.

[QuietlyquietlyParticipant 728]

My bad, perhaps she didn’t.

I agree with you, evidence is evidence. But I think the problem comes down to the University or College. If they own the land and buildings, it’s private property, and it’s likely that if you voluntarily choose to engage in activities on that private property, you have to agree to a private code of conduct, which, while totally unenforceable by law, might very well be enforceable within the private grounds.

So the situation would then appear much as it has done with Mattress Girl: Police are bound by public laws, use the evidence available, conclude that she’s lying, drop charges. University can make up whatever it likes, you agree to be bound by it under threat of not being able to take a course, or graduate, and they can choose to ban you for any behaviour you have agreed to. Your professional life is over before it started.

I guess it all falls under contract law. Some bright law student is likely to get hold of it and challenge it and lose, like the UK guy who sued his University for sexist bias in the gender studies course.

Eventually, it will just turn all men away from University education, I give it 10-15 years. 10-15 years after that, I expect the USA to suffer a huge shortage of middle-management positions as the only graduates will be women, and they are now having babies, and stopping work. So in roughly 30 years time, if the USA hasn’t manufactured a way to drastically decrease the population before then, they will suffer a skills shortage of the likes no one has ever seen, and have to import literally millions of skilled white collar workers from India and China to fill the positions, whilst simultaneously having to support (whether by Welfare or Prison) the same amount of millions of unemployable white Americans who found that option safer than going to University.

[Mr. SpockParticipant 10930]

“Where have all the good men gone?” is becoming “Why have ALL the men gone?”

Feminism isn't about equality with men, it's about leverage over men.

[FrankyParticipant 2338]

“we’ve got to find a way to but these men in jail somehow”

[Author]

Posts