"What was she wearing," is one of the best examples of feminist neuroses. Barely anyone actually ever says it, but feminists have convinced themselves it's the go-to response to rape allegations.
Meanwhile, the handful of people who do say stupid shit like that are mostly sheltered middle aged women who are just too stupid to realize what they're even saying because they've never been called on their bullshit once in their entire life and thus have no filter between their brain and their mouth.
"What was she wearing" is the bailey, a prepared and easily defended talking point they try to drag everything else towards or retreat to when they're losing grip on the narrative. It's not neurosis but self-serving dishonesty that they constantly try to pretend reasonable questions about the circumstances of an allegation are all just "what was she wearing?".
Really it's not surprising to me they'd keep that con going and extend it to their other cult-y beliefs too, they're so used to forcing that phrase into inapplicable situations they probably don't even bat an eyelid anymore.
Feminists also reframe the police asking for description of clothes at the time of the alleged event for the purpose of searching video evidence or ask potential witness, as "blaming the victim".
Somewhere out there, there's a criminal who only targets women who wear ripped jeans and collared v-neck shirts with at least three colors on them, but because "what were you wearing" is illegal to ask as a criminal profiling tool, they've gone free for years.
It's not just women. Most liberals haven't been 'punched by reality in the mouth,' that's why they're liberal. A healthy fear of the world and appreciation of the need for self-defense is one of the two mindsets that the left lacks. (The other is a sense of the sacred. 'Godless liberal' isn't just a meme.)
"Did they have pre-existing conditions" is the new "but what was she wearing"
Pre-existing conditions may or may not be by the person's choosing. What a person is wearing is always by their choosing.
In my experience, comments saying that rape is justified because of what a woman was wearing are vanishingly rare. Usually actual comments seem to be in the same context as "lock your car" or otherwise being cautious in crime-ridden areas.
If a man is shot for wearing gang colors in an area with gangs and the police advise people not to wear gang colors in gang areas they aren't saying it was justified. Feminists are so afraid of the mere thought of personal responsibility that they take what is supposed to be simple advice for preventing crime - don't call attention to yourself in areas where it is dangerous to do so - and twist it into this nonsensical hatred toward victims of crime.
"What was she wearing," is one of the best examples of feminist neuroses. Barely anyone actually ever says it, but feminists have convinced themselves it's the go-to response to rape allegations.
Meanwhile, the handful of people who do say stupid shit like that are mostly sheltered middle aged women who are just too stupid to realize what they're even saying because they've never been called on their bullshit once in their entire life and thus have no filter between their brain and their mouth.
"What was she wearing" is the bailey, a prepared and easily defended talking point they try to drag everything else towards or retreat to when they're losing grip on the narrative. It's not neurosis but self-serving dishonesty that they constantly try to pretend reasonable questions about the circumstances of an allegation are all just "what was she wearing?".
Really it's not surprising to me they'd keep that con going and extend it to their other cult-y beliefs too, they're so used to forcing that phrase into inapplicable situations they probably don't even bat an eyelid anymore.
Feminists also reframe the police asking for description of clothes at the time of the alleged event for the purpose of searching video evidence or ask potential witness, as "blaming the victim".
Somewhere out there, there's a criminal who only targets women who wear ripped jeans and collared v-neck shirts with at least three colors on them, but because "what were you wearing" is illegal to ask as a criminal profiling tool, they've gone free for years.
It's not just women. Most liberals haven't been 'punched by reality in the mouth,' that's why they're liberal. A healthy fear of the world and appreciation of the need for self-defense is one of the two mindsets that the left lacks. (The other is a sense of the sacred. 'Godless liberal' isn't just a meme.)
you may not be a ho, but you are wearing a ho uniform. that can be mighty confusing
Pre-existing conditions may or may not be by the person's choosing. What a person is wearing is always by their choosing.
In my experience, comments saying that rape is justified because of what a woman was wearing are vanishingly rare. Usually actual comments seem to be in the same context as "lock your car" or otherwise being cautious in crime-ridden areas.
If a man is shot for wearing gang colors in an area with gangs and the police advise people not to wear gang colors in gang areas they aren't saying it was justified. Feminists are so afraid of the mere thought of personal responsibility that they take what is supposed to be simple advice for preventing crime - don't call attention to yourself in areas where it is dangerous to do so - and twist it into this nonsensical hatred toward victims of crime.
Faggot
pronoun lives don't matter
It's not the fact that she's a woman, you utter loon. It's the presence of pronouns at all that's the identifier.
Engaging with the pronoun bullshit is a sign of either obeisance or mental illness, same as the bright colored hair thing.
Yeah if someone voluntarily puts their pronouns, I automatically dismiss their credibility