Breaking the Silence

@jose1122 said in #346:
> What would you do? Would you beat him?

No, I'm not allowed to beat people. I'm sure you are aware of that.

But I would certainly not treat him with any respect. This means no invitations to birthday parties, no access to internet communities I am the admin of, etc.

Basically anything I am allowed to do legally.

It continues to amaze me that people keep thinking that law is the only definition of moral behaviour that is relevant. It's not.

@Bulletkrieg For arguments sake: Let's say, that there is pressure on men that you mentioned, it's quite obvious that it's a new trend compared to all ages of human history, while the pressure on women always has been high.

There is a very interesting book in the Bible saying at one point: For if you remain silent at this time, relief and deliverance for the Jews will arise from another place, but you and your father’s family will perish. And who knows but that you have come to your royal position for such a time as this?

I apply the principle behind this story like this: If you men won't enter into your calling to rule, protect and grow society, a solution will be found, but you will be the losers in the story. Men failed to protect women from craziness of trends and they will be swept out by the same trends ultimately. You won't save your lifes by being a cowards.

@Bulletkrieg said in #349:
> There you go, you're a beta male who can't even protect his gf.
> If someone touched my gf or sister or mom, I would send him to the graveyard in the most brutal way.

Good luck with doing prison time to protect your girl.

@sin_kills said in #348:
> "For arguments sake: Let's say, that there is pressure on men that you mentioned, it's quite obvious that it's a new trend compared to all ages of human history, while the pressure on women always has been high."

learn History and stop spreading stuff that is simply not true, revisionist.

Men died in countless wars, were drafted, had to perform, earn money, etc to find a wife, fashion was for a very long time heavily men focused but I doubt you allow that thought.. ... killed themselves for women, fought for honour, .... ..

I hope that you realize one day that all humans are human and share the same struggle and suffering....

I support the civil position of Lichess. We must constantly fight for the rights of people.

@Molurus said in #347:
> No, I'm not allowed to beat people. I'm sure you are aware of that.
>
> But I would certainly not treat him with any respect. This means no invitations to birthday parties, no access to internet communities I am the admin of, etc.
>
> Basically anything I am allowed to do legally.
>
> It continues to amaze me that people keep thinking that law is the only definition of moral behaviour that is relevant. It's not.

Morals are ruled by laws as well, and you are the one talking about laws, ok forget the laws, you said you won’t treat the accused with respect, it means you judged him already in your mind without enough material, you are running the risk of being unjust.

@jose1122 said in #353:
> Morals are ruled by laws as well, and you are the one talking about laws, ok forget the laws, you said you won’t treat the accused with respect, it means you judged him already in your mind without enough material, you are running the risk of being unjust.

Without conclusive evidence either way I run that risk. I prefer not speculating my girfriend is lying over falsely accusing some guy of being an a-hole.

And in many, nearly all cases, like this it's like that. As was already pointed out in this topic numerous times: leaving open the possibility that, say, Ramirez is innocent directly amounts to saying Jennifer Shahade could be lying. Which is also an accusation, let's not forget that.

Granted, she could be lying. That possibility is really not that interesting.

This is not a law suit. You don't have to pretend Ramirez is innocent until proven guilty. You really don't. If a woman accuses you of sexual misconduct, and there is no specific reason to think she's lying, you're in very deep trouble. And you should be. Even without evidence you should be.

@sin_kills said in #348:
> @Bulletkrieg For arguments sake: Let's say, that there is pressure on men that you mentioned, it's quite obvious that it's a new trend compared to all ages of human history, while the pressure on women always has been high.
>
> There is a very interesting book in the Bible saying at one point: For if you remain silent at this time, relief and deliverance for the Jews will arise from another place, but you and your father’s family will perish. And who knows but that you have come to your royal position for such a time as this?
>
> I apply the principle behind this story like this: If you men won't enter into your calling to rule, protect and grow society, a solution will be found, but you will be the losers in the story. Men failed to protect women from craziness of trends and they will be swept out by the same trends ultimately. You won't save your lifes by being a cowards.

Remember the 8th Commandment: “Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour”

Whenever you put women as infallible criatures, you’ll be deceiving yourself as a good christian, because they lie too. Eventually you’ll have a false witness in front of you, and by defending liars you are bearing false witness against someone together.

You are assuming men are wrong, no proofs are needed and that’s it. Seek the truth, otherwise you’ll be killed by your sins.

@jose1122 said in #356:
> You are assuming men are wrong, no proofs are needed and that’s it.

This works in two directions, you get that, right? You are assuming women are liars, no proof needed for that.

How did this post get so long already...