when theranos founder and ceo was going through a rough spot and people were piling on her I was waiting for actual proof (unfortunately, it came). When Hillary Clinton got defamed in Italy I defended her from baseless accusations (sorry if I am not a frequent poster in this forum). If most powerful/famous human beings are white males, whoever comes to his senses and despises the court of public opinion will end up defending mostly white males. Even if only trying to uphold the "innocent until proven guilty" principle.

Not only I am not "the" (or a) problem, I am am an active force of good trying to instill common sense in fanatical thinking processes. You do the same when you bash frantic racists, nationalists and so on.

If only "people like me" think lynch mobs should never exist and it's a primary moral duty for decent people to actively be against lynch mobs in every occasion, no exceptions, then so be it.

Luciom's memory in unreliable shocker:
So yeah, nada, zip, zero, bupkes, el zilch, the duck-egg, full radio silence, NOT ONE WORD.

Now, I know what you meant - you didn't read that thread. What you're saying is that I didn't dig up a thread no-one had posted in for over a fortnight to vent about some grudge from last year. Why would I? I don't have any grudges from last year. You're the one who decided to spend most of a week stepping on rakes before flouncing off in a huff. Though maybe you don't remember that?

The USA taught the world what the rule of law was at Nuremberg. That was such a powerful example, the distillation of rule by example we so sorely lack today. Italy's communists were in a hurry to find and kill Mussolini (they managed to do so) because they knew the American would have tried him in a court of law.

You have shown the world that no matter how deeply disgusting an human being can be thought to be he/she still deserves due process before his life is destroyed.

Now the supposedly moral side of the American equation, the left that has to deal with the trumpian monster and all his moral failings, is going on in several directions with demented policy proposal that sound like if they came out of a Soviet, and public lynching campaigns and the sort you discussed in this thread.

So even I really understand how it feels when deranged people are taking over your country (our current Italian government is a deep embarrassement), i still can't find any excuse for this metoo campaign and for the typical style of radical leftists campaigns in the usa.

You can't compromise on sacred values like "innocent until proven guilty", or free speech, no matter how disgusting your opponent is.

I think most serious people involved in politics believe this, but let's see what people think.

Thank you, Luciom.

Counterpoint:


And since you LOL-of-****ing-course aren't going out to bat for Argento's presumed innocence, let me just make this clear: It may be the language barrier, for all that you have excellent English, but whatever the reason, you are just not capable of fooling a competent interlocutor here. Maybe you have every Italian leftist you know in a real tizzy, with them all thinking you're this morally consistent good-faith commentator and boy what difficult questions these are, but it's not gonna work here, man. You're just gonna keep stepping on rakes.

LOLOL

pdox has spent most of his time in this forum going to bat for "I dunno, is Donald Trump actually racist? I'm not convinced!" and now it's time for him to join up with literal MRAs

very funny, goofyballer.

I had to look up MRA. Enjoyed the second definition on urban dictionary.

why do you say "counterpoint" showing a barbaric and brutal murder committed by communists in my country?

Are you confirming that deep inside you are glad that it happened? That you concurred with that course of action? I hope not.

Argento is irremediably compromised as a moral agent NOT because she settled sex harassment (or was it violence) accusations agaisnt her out of court. The court is said to have a selfie of that so it seems we have more proof than usual doesn't it?

No the problem is she did that, she knew there was nothing bad in doing that, and she still wielded the puritan axe high for vengeance (or notoriety, we will never know) against other people.

The last people on earth that need our help to defend themselves against violence (sexual or otherwise) are wealthy, beautiful, charismatic and famous girls and boys from the movies.

While in all this real women and men are getting raped, sometimes by powerful men and women (although as we all know it happens more often from family members -or priests) and their life is MORE DIFFICULT after this ****show of metoo propaganda. Why? Because, at least in Italy, the "fake accusation for hidden agenda" is now the basic position a reasonable observer will take, when confronted with rape accusations against a powerful person.

Now if we cared about protecting innocents and giving them voice, as I do, we would give them a way to talk to the police asap, psychological counseling to deal with the emotional aftermath of the terrible experience, money to relocate if they need to flee from a domestic abuser, and we would work for them to be able to carry on their life in anonymity, which is what the vast majority of victims of heinous crimes need.

But that doesn't allow for virtue signalling. Doesn't allow for catwalking all with the same dress color to shock the press. Doesn't allow for personal advantages for the people who promote that idea.

You get stuck in day to day managing of practical stuff, in trying pragmatically to marginally improve the situation. Too boring, too slow for the people who don't give a **** about real innocents getting raped.

The glamour of a high profile scandal, covered for months, where we can also add in some white patriarchy bashing that pleases the radical leftist crowd we pander too... That's what we want am I right?

lol

LOL

HAHAHAHAHA

"I spend a bunch of time online trying to discredit rape accusations because I care so much about rape victims"

WOOOOOOOOO this thread is LIT today

Lol Luciom. You are. Literally advocating for what you then describe as the worst case scenario: treating all public accusers as liars.

that seems a radical left definition (I had to Google it and get over magnetic resonance). Decent rightwing people don't care specifically for the rights of a subset of the population. They simply don't approach society in that way. Like here it's not rape victims we should care about specifically (even if of course we want them to be able to get justice), but victims of crimes in general, and potential victims of crimes even more generally (ie all citizens).

And potential accusation of innocents.

We want, I hope, a society where no1 is victimized without recourse, and at the same time no1 can have his/her life destroyed by baseless accusations. And the system we are supposed to have in place, if political propaganda stayed out of the picture, allows for that! Maybe not every time, so let'improve the process. Let's identify potential victims that don't come forward asap for various reasons and let's fix those reasons when possible.

But at the same time being extremely careful not to damage any innocent in the process. With the same care we would talk to a rape victim, we should treat the risk of innocent normal people getting destroyed by famelic bloodthirsty crowds of deranged radicals.

ALL CRIMES MATTER

no i advocate not to have "public accusers" anymore. You accuse in court, and you never say something damaging in public about some1 if you can't prove it. I don't know how libel laws are in the usa in detail, but I know defamation is a crime in Italy.

We define it as ruining somebody reputation while speaking in public.

Except for when that reason is "scared of being stalked with death threats and 'bitches be lying' accusations by internet misogynists", weird how MRAs never seem to want to address their own behavior as a reason why rape victims don't come forward

Do you know how rape trials go? The trial is usually made to be about the victim being a liar. And everything said in court is in public.

I wanted to look up the Brizzi story, and came across this story:

Italy Reportedly Drops Case In Part Because Woman ‘Too Old’ To Be Harassed

Seems like a wonderful place. No problems with taking sexual harassment seriously at all.

are you arguing for all rape trials to be conducted at closed doors? I couldn't agree more.

Let the press be present for transparent and public trust (for high profile cases) but holding all the content until judgment is made.

Edit: I'd actually like it for all trials that involve public figures because they all have reputational effects

I'm so sorry to disappoint, lol. Yes, I think it was no bad thing at all that Mussolini went out like he did, pour encourager les autres. In the circumstances, lack of due process there is more like a parking violation. Wag your fingers at those Communists and their brash exuberance and youthful high spirits and look the other way, don't let me see it again, lads.

I didn't bother reading the rest, but from the replies I can see those rakes are still out there, lurking. Waiting. Ready to pounce.

How did you manage to forget all about the Weinstein scandal when it's mentioned multiple times ITT?

if deranged rightwing radicals threaten people that's of course something I would like to stop. Dunno why you seem to imply I have something to do with it.

You popped into this thread to suggest that Argento assaulting a 17 year old boy means that women shouldn't be trusted when they accuse others of rape and those who didn't believe her are "reasonable skeptics".

I am not "seeming to imply" anything. You are the reason women don't want to come forward with rape accusations. YOU.

do you know that it was a race between centrist/Catholic partisans and communists to get Mussolini? The centrists wanted to court Marshall him. The communists wanted blood, as a seed for the new utopian communist Italy they were hoping to achieve. There is a very nice movie about it (the last days of Mussolini)

What they showed to non disgusting Italians, and to the world, was the utter incompatibility of communism and civilization.

But thanks to you for admitting you don't care about the rule of law and you just want to see your enemies hanged by their feet to teach others. I already know this was typical on the radical left (and one of the very reasons the radical left is inimical to civilized human life) but actual confirmation of priors is always useful.

Cool, races are fun, lol.

i thought I had made myself clear. Her having sex with a 17y old for me its proof she DOESN'T THINK THAT IS SUCH A BAD THING. 17y olds can be consensual (no matter what some Puritanism might think), can be sexually mature, and that's it.

Argento can't be trusted to be in good faith on the sexual harrassement/violence topic at all because we have proof of what she really thinks (having sex with a 17y old for her is not a bad thing) but we heard her saying that it was a terrible crime when an old guy proposed a 16-17y old female to have sex.