Call it what you want. You’re the one making shit up, starting with saying that the reason Neeson is being criticized is because he isn’t accepting the philosophy of #metoo in its fullest form. And rather than asking why he’s being criticized, you keep up with this fantasy because that’s the only way you can make any…

I’m sorry you don’t understand context. :( Multiple posters have said something along the lines of “a man can’t say anything but wholehearted agreement with the movement without being shit on/burned/attacked. Men are damned if they do, damned if they don’t.” I’m sorry you didn’t see this or make the connection. It…

I mean I guess, but I’m not sure what “discussion” you expected to flow from your five-word comment.

I never suggested that we take every woman’s story as fact. I’m sorry that happened to you but that was never the argument I was making. Nor does it apply to the vast majority who are suffering consequences now, as most of them have admitted to what they did.

You don’t have to buy it. I’m not selling it. I also never said that disagreeing with criticism denotes fragility.

It’s people disagreeing with him. Whether he’s done something “wrong” is a matter of opinion. I happen to think it’s wrong of him to sell the narrative that men are losing their jobs over touching women on the knee. Am I “shaming” him by saying so?

And yet for some reason you argue when I say men are fucking fragile. Imagine that.

Exactly, they’re not. You could also look at centuries of history to figure it out. If you care to research it, you will see that the vast majority of violence against women is due to feelings of male insecurity.

And I hope one day you learn about the existence of the word “you’re,” but I imagine both of our hopes will be left unfulfilled.

Oh? Like when a horde of men descended on Tig Notaro with boycotts and rape threats and death threats when she dared accuse Louis CK of sexual assault? That kind of fragility?

A part of what fire? A public figure getting extremely mild criticism for using really problematic language when talking about violence against women? I’m happy to be a part of that fire, and if you think people responding to a public figure’s public words equals “burning,” then yes, I have to stick with fragile.…

Paying men less is only a punishment if you believe that men deserve more for being men.

Then you’ve just lost your IRA. Please donate it to the Me Too and Black Lives Matter legal funds.

I’ve seen full grown men cry an scream when their preferred sports team lost. What’s your point?

Did I ask for a trigger warning? But definitely go ahead and take that one comment divorced from its entire context—Internet and real-life MRAs. If you consider that Jezebel article harsh and scathing criticism, then you are fucking fragile.

Innocent men, I said. Read, please.

What’s that supposed to be an “example” of, exactly? Everyone knows that men were also included in witch hunts. You don’t have to be a history major with a specialty in medieval Europe to know that. You just have to not be a dumbass. What does that have to do with anything though?

Actually no. A witch hunt isn’t one person being accused and punished for something without a proof. A witch hunt is a systematic targeting and punishment of multiple people of a specific category without any proof for crimes they couldn’t possibly be guilty of. Unless there has been a rash of innocent men accused and…

“I literally said none of the things you’re ranting about.”

I do, and metaphors only work when they are analogous. There is nothing similar about the witch hunts and what’s happening here.