It doesn’t matter if he didn’t use the term properly, as that is not what is being discussed here. Nor have I used the term improperly, as I haven’t used the term. You should read harder.

You’re weird, and boring. Which is a bit of an unusual combination.

It’s weird city that you think that’s weird city, and weirder city that that is what stuck out to you about the story. Kelcey isn’t even a strange name.

Why were you on the fence about it, and why is the name ‘weird city?’

What you’re saying in the first paragraph would only be an example of patriarchy if A) you believe a boy victim in the same circumstance would have been believed, or B) you believe a girl 3rd party witness wouldn’t be believed. There is no evidence of either in this case -hence- it’s a really shitty example of…

I never said they couldn’t have been manipulated.

I’m not too busy, I just care not a bit about her theories on how she thinks I’m interpreting evidence. It’s a silly comment. I just went back and read instead of skimming, and I was correct in my assumption.

Thanks for the following up in good faith.

No, you’re missing the point. Saying that this is an example of patriarchy implies that boys who are molested are believed, and girls who are molested aren’t believed, when in reality, the history of boys being molested and not believed is truly awful. This is not an area where boys have privilege, which is why it’s a…

I like the way you attempt to end the conversation in advance, by pretending you’re above discussing it. Pathetic, but unsurprising. I’m going to clearly tell you why you’re wrong. Now, I don’t know if you’re wrong because you’re intellectually dishonest, or if you’re wrong because you’re just missing the point, but…

What about my comment indicated I thought it was a competition?

Nothing I said could be construed as making me a male rights activist. Her comment is simply self-righteous sanctimony masquerading as commentary. She doesn’t know anything about me, and more importantly, doesn’t know anything about my experience with sexual abuse.

Yikes. No chance I’m reading that entire comment, as it appears you’re simply attempting to convince me he should have been found not guilty, which means you agree with me.

It’s as though you’re trying to convince me he should have been found not guilty when I’ve repeatedly stated that, including my very first comment.

This has to be a joke, right? You’re attempting to respond as if you’re a parody, correct?

This response makes fucking ZERO sense, you self-righteous nerd. I’ve said absolutely zero that would give any indication I’m some MRA, so go ahead and fuck right off. You also have ZERO clue about me or what I know about the sexual abuse of children, so, again, please go ahead and fuck right off with your bullshit…

Turning into?

I mean...this is a really bad example, right? C’mon. Young boys are molested and not believed all the time. If there is one place where men/boys don’t have a huge edge, it’s getting molested and then not believed, right? Doesn’t this have more to do with the fact there was a third party witness, like a lot of things?

Sure, and they never gave any plausible explanation on how it could hav been done, but for the Sheriff’s officer tampering with evidence. There is little doubt in my mind they attempted to frame him. The only question: were they framing an already guilty man.

No, see, that’s the part I’m most with you on. The virtual worthlessness of eye witness testimony. I read a book a few years ago called ‘Surviving Justice.’ First person accounts of people wrongfully convicted. Shattered my brain. What’s most disappointing is how many people in our justice system don’t see to get the…