Your Defense of Jackie is Weak (A response to Jessica Valenti)

Here’s a thing to know about Puritan Feminists – they will never, ever admit when they’re wrong.  If they’re shown to be wrong, without any form of doubt, then they just double-down on how right they are.  These people truly are the liberal equivalent of the Tea Party.  The progressive-left is the new tea party-right, and nowhere has it been so spectacularly on display than with the events surrounding the supposed rape that Rolling Stone reporter Sabrina Rubin Erdely reported on.  A reporter went out into the world, with the understanding that she was going to find a story about college rape, and without even the slightest bit of journalistic skepticism, she found one.  From a woman whose narrative doesn’t stand up to any scrutiny.  Recently, the police came out with a report that absolutely none of Jackie’s story could be corroborated.  None of it.  The entire thing was fabricated.  There is evidence of this.  All the feminists who came out in support of Jackie, you’d think, would now have some egg on their face.  But nope!  Now they’ve got entitled white suburbanite defender Jessica Valenti doubling-down on it.  Why?  Well, let’s not get ahead of ourselves.

In another intellectually-void article in The Guardian, (linked here) Valenti lays out why – just because Jackie’s entire story, from first to last, is false, doesn’t mean that she wasn’t the victim of a crime!  I partially agree with Valenti.  She wasn’t the victim of a crime.  She was the perpetrator of one.  And, if you ask me, Jackie should spend some time behind bars.  Let’s get started.

“No evidence” of a rape does not mean that a rape didn’t happen. But try telling that to anyone of a number of media outlets who, when the Charlottesville Police Department released their findings on “Jackie” (the University of Virginia student whose alleged rape was at the center of a widely-disputed Rolling Stone article) essentially indicated to their readers that nothing happened to her.

The matter isn’t that there is no evidence of a rape, Jessica.  The matter at hand is – Jackie’s entire story was fabricated.  Every single part of it that she told police has been exposed as a lie.  Not only that, but Jackie refused to work with the police investigation.  Why would that be?  Wouldn’t she want the police to get to the bottom of her case if she was raped, so that justice could be served?  I can already hear the feminist apologists – “Women who go through rape are often tormented and mistreated by the police!  She might have felt unsure of her safety!  She didn’t want to relive the event!”  These people are worse than creationists.  The truth is that rape is taken very seriously in this country.  Why do you think that the media blitz was so big after the article in Rolling Stone?

The fact is – there is absolutely zero evidence to corroborate anything that Jackie said happened.  That, combined with her refusal to cooperated with the authorities has people thinking that she might have, you know, lied.  Because she did.

Longo echoed what anti-rape experts have been saying all along: while holes in Jackie story could mean that she lied about some things, either to the reporter or the dean to whom she originally spoke, it doesn’t necessarily mean she lied about being raped.

Wow.  What would it take, Jessica, for Jackie’s credibility to be damaged, to you?  I asked because here are a few things the police were able to uncover in their investigation –

The fraternity (Phi Kappa Psi) was not having a party the weekend when the rape was supposed to have occurred
The fraternity members that Jackie accused of raping her weren’t even part of that fraternity
The party supposedly happened during the fall, and that the rape was a hazing ritual for new pledges.  Phi Kappa Psi wasn’t taking new pledges in the fall.
She says that she was told by her friends not to go to the police.  Her friends told her to go to police, even pushing her to do so. (which makes the fact that she refused to work with the authorities that much more damning)
Her statement about being horribly beaten was contradicted by her friends, who said that she did not look injured.
The number of people that Jackie claims raped her has continually inflated over time.
New evidence has come forward that the men that she says raped her don’t even EXIST

This evidence has made this pretty much open-and-shut.  Jackie lied.  Her entire story was fabricated.  It was fabricated to sell a narrative that a shitty reporter with a chip on her shoulder was looking to sell.  What more evidence will it take for you to accept that Jackie’s story was a lie?

To sexual assault experts, “false reporting” is frequently recognized not as an indication that the victim is lying about being raped, but that she may be changing the circumstances of her attack in an effort to make her story more empathetic in a culture that largely disbelieves victims.

Are you fucking kidding me?!  Wow!  Just…unbelievable!  Her completely fabricated story is just her way of trying to make herself more empathetic to us EVIL Americans who think that all women who get raped as asking for it.  That’s the narrative that you’re trying to push?  Just once, I wish that one of you Puritan Feminists didn’t have a narrative.  Objectively, it cannot be denied that Jackie’s story was a lie, from the ground up.  Where the people who she says attacked her may not even exist.  For you to say that it’s totally cool for her to make a false allegation is insane.  It’s insane because it sets a VERY dangerous precedent.  One that, I guarantee you, would be used against men.  Because if we are just supposed to believe women who claim to be raped, when there is no supporting evidence, and the evidence they gave is uncovered to be lies, then we are throwing the entire criminal justice system under the bus!  Because then it isn’t innocent until proven guilty.  It’s guilty because she says so, and any evidence against her means nothing.

The center’s research showed that even when a woman has been raped, it’s “quite common” for victims to change the details of the attack: they may say they were assaulted vaginally because talking about oral or anal rape is too embarrassing; they may blame the attack on a stranger because the actual perpetrator is their partner; they may lie about drinking alcohol, taking drugs or other behaviors they think might undermine their credibility.

You see, Jessica, you raise a good point.  That’s why rape is so hard to prosecute.  Typically, there isn’t any physical evidence.  So it all comes down to he-said she-said.  Because our criminal justice system is designed with a person being innocent until proven guilty, that’s the name of the game.  Don’t like it?  Too bad!  Guilt has to be proven, beyond a reasonable doubt.  If that doubt still exists after all the evidence is gathered, then that’s how it goes.  If you don’t like that, I’m sorry, but that’s how it goes.  Deal with it.

The truth is that we don’t know what happened to Jackie, and likely never will. She never wanted to make a police report – and apparently still doesn’t – and, given how she was thrown under the bus by Rolling Stone, it’s extremely unlikely that she’ll ever trust the media. But here’s what we do know: it’s much more likely for a rape victim to lie about the details of her attack than for a woman to fabricate a sexual assault whole cloth. Until we stop blaming women for being raped and start to build a culture where women feel safe telling their whole stories, we’ll never know the full truth of sexual assault.

It’s so easy, Jessica, to simply accept that a person has no flaws, isn’t it?  You can just log any any all disagreement away with the rest of the opinions, saying that you’re right, because “rape culture.”  But here’s the thing – there is no rape culture.  Not in this country, anyway.  You give vague statements about how the public doesn’t believe rape victims, when this whole media blitz that surrounded Jackie’s story shows that the public takes rape very seriously.  The Star Chambers that universities are implementing, where the accused rapists are not even given due process are popping up all over the place.  If there is one group of people who are clearly well-represented in respect to sexual crimes, it’s women who claim to be raped.

You know who doesn’t have any representation?  The accused?  From the Duke lacrosse players, whose lives were ruined, to a fraternity who can thank a terrible reporter for dragging their name through the mud (for which they should rightly sue Rolling Stone for everything they’re worth!).  But hey, at least at Duke, there was some justice for that injustice.  The overzealous prosecutor for that case got disbarred.  What justice will be met here?  Will Jackie go to jail, as she rightly should, for filing a false accusation?  I doubt it.  After all, the police haven’t even technically closed the case.  Probably out of fear of being endlessly harassed by the Puritan Feminist lynch mobs who would harass them about that endlessly.

Say that I’m being too harsh.  Maybe you’re right.  But when I read an article talking about how false allegations of rape should not only be accepted, but also believed, that drives me up the fucking wall!  Puritan Feminists don’t care about facts!  They don’t care about evidence!  They don’t care about the truth! The facts have unmasked a person who has clearly lied needs to go to jail for False Allegation, and they don’t care.  They double-down.  Why?

Because name me a Puritan Feminist who doesn’t have a narrative to sell.  They all do.  It’s all they really have.

Until next time, a quote,

“It is bad when one thing becomes two. One should not look for anything else in the Way of the Samurai. It is the same for anything that is called a Way. If one understands things in this manner, he should be able to hear about all ways and be more and more in accord with his own.”  -Hagakure

Peace out,

Maverick

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “Your Defense of Jackie is Weak (A response to Jessica Valenti)

  1. It’s like, did they stop making kids read to Kill a Mockingbird in schools around 2000 or something? Or did they decide to start teaching that Atticus Finch was the villain? Mayella Ewall needed us to listen and habeeb!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s