Bettina: There's a fake profile with your name, @bettinaa -- just FYI you might want to ask it be taken down. I just messaged it, thinking it was you. I messaged because there is an unusual person commenting on my post who seems a little unhinged: Peter Andrew Nolan. He mentioned you knew about his case. He also wished violence on women and girls and was angry at "women journalists" for "ignoring" him. I blocked him as he seemed crazy and i don't write on gender issues. I just wondered if he was a real person or a troll-bot.
In Scotland since UNFAIR TRIALS became the norm we don’t know who in prison is:
- a monster
- a decent man who met a vindictive woman who became intent on destroying him.
Monetary rewards is a factor as in the UK compensation is paid out for REPORTING sexual assault, no evidence of physical or mental injury is required. Multiple compensation claims from the same individual are not investigated. It’s a VERY lucrative business for telling lies.
Presumably, under Kant's Categorical Imperative, the same 'voluntary' programme will be rolled out to female teachers who 'seduce' boys under their authority..?
No.?? Silly me.
I forgot that women's prisons are to be abolished.
Rape is sexual intercourse without consent. Obviously, if the female didn't really enjoy it or feels sleazy the morning after, she knows she did not "really" consent so she was raped. How vapid these modern delicate female flowers are!
This is a new form of discrimination and abuse that cannot be overlooked. I am a woman and I cannot believe that there are people from my gender that are this destructive and believe that they are the above the law and should rule over everyone else. This is not okay. No one gender is better or worse than the other. My colleague and I just did an article called When Women Are the Abusers - The Invisible Crisis of Male Domestic Violence Victims. This article notes over 30 high profile national and international cases of women abusing and murdering. As of this week, there are at least 2 more cases of women in the news abusing and murdering.
Great comment , I’m reminded of a case from Geraldton, West Australia , a woman doctor had beaten her husband to death with a hammer as be lay in bed , she then claimed to be the “victim” , unbelievably the justice system believed her and she got off very lightly , out of jail only 6 months after her trial.
Feminists are try to modify the evidentiary standards in our courts ("beyond reasonable doubt" in our criminal courts and the low-bar "balance of probability" in our civil (which includes the family court)) to "𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘦𝘷𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘪𝘴 𝘯𝘦𝘦𝘥𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘴𝘶𝘱𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘵 𝘰𝘳𝘥𝘦𝘳𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘫𝘶𝘥𝘨𝘦 /𝘮𝘢𝘨𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘦 /𝘳𝘦𝘨𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘳 𝘥𝘦𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘸𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥 𝘮𝘢𝘬𝘦 𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘤𝘢𝘴𝘦 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘶𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘨𝘰𝘵 𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘳𝘪𝘢𝘭."
The reduction of the evidentiary standard in our courts will normalise what happened in my children’s family law case (I call it "my children's case" as they were on trial as to whether or not they would be allowed to have a meaningful relationship with their father)
From the start of my children’s family law trial, I had freely admitted to the one instance of physical domestic violence (no physical injuries) between my then wife and me.
Even though this incident had occured 6 years before the trial and my ex-wife had stated that no other physical DV incidents had occured, the judge and barrister for the icl treated it as if it had occured in the past few months and that one incident clear demonstrated a "pattern of behaviour" as the barrister surmised.
I was first on the witness stand and was questioned about this incident by the judge who asked "did you squeeze?" I responded with an emphatical "No!" and a scowl. In his orders "Reasons", the judge changed this "No" to a "Yes" and to rub my face in his misandristic evidence tampering, he add for good measure "then he smiled." The audio and transcript still clearly have "No" recorded, though other recordings were interfered with by this judge.
When I cross-examined my ex-wife when she was in the witness box, she categorically denied that the incident had ever occured; she sort to avoided being questioned about her deliberate ongoing provocation that led to me responding inappropriately.
The judge in his reasons noted this denial only as "the wife spoke otherwise" and then speculated that this "might have been another incident (raised 2.5 years earlier, but not at trial)" and concluded that his surmising was correct.
This judge effectively deported my children; Australian citizens and Habitual Residents since birth and claiming that the 18 months that they were Internationally Abducted outweighed the 32 months they had been back in Australia after 2 Hague Convention Return Orders (under The Hague Convention, Habitual Residence is 12 or more months continuous residence in a country) or the years before abduction growing up in Australia.
Further, this judge would deliberately sabotage my "lines of questioning" by, without waiting for the person in witness box to reply, interjecting from the bench and speculating as to what the answer would likely be. That is, telling that person how to reply to keep the narrative on track.
The barrister took the approach of carefully leading my ex-wife with question to which she could verbatim regurgitate the implied required response to his question.
Even prior to handing down his deportation orders, this judge was well aware that my wife viewed compliance with court orders as "optional" and that, once the mother removed herself and the children from the Australian jurisdiction (thereby deliberately placing her beyond Australian law), she could have the Australian orders annulled by a court in her jurisdiction, which she did so as to avoid spending $15K annually flying 4 children to Australia each year.
One could say without contradiction, that these orders are yet another example of orders hand down in the family court that the judge knows full well won't be complied with nor expects them to be complied with.
The bizarre anti male culture of the justice system cannot last , women should bear this in mind and remember the story of the boy who cried wolf. Pretending to be the victim works for a while but people wise up and things can change quickly .
ACT ~ 20 times more than 5 years ago? A factoid created to support the feminist narrative; the family court also does this to justify more misogynisticly biased changes to the Family Law Act..
Even with the 3.5 times growth rate, even more meritless cases will now be going to trial without investigation and lacking creditable evidence. This influx of cases will cause longer delays before the case is heard, denying the accused of a timely (and fair) trial.
No doubt when the the courts start throwing these flimsy cases out, the feminists will shrill "the courts/judges are misogynists" and demand further reductions in the evidentiary standards, broadening of definitions and increased power for the prosecutor to have evidence excluded that does not support a conviction.
“I was on remand in jail for close to a year, negotiating with the Department of Public Prosecutions and waiting for my trial, in horrible, smelly old jails full of roaches and scummy people. No fun at all.”
Reading the above account, there is a strong indication that this man was deliberately set up.
From my understanding, until the feminists achieve 100% conviction rate of men who are accused of sexual assault, they will not stop.
Not surprising this is happening in Scotland the land of the “ Celtic women “ the Pagan goddesses who still resent Christianity as a tool of the dreaded “patriarchy “ The most strident anti -male feminists have mostly been women of Celtic ancestry and still are , they’re in power now , parliament , senior government , the judiciary, even big business.
Their hatred of men knows no bounds , to them it’s ok to jail an innocent man , because he’s a
“Man” and that’s a crime in itself to these demented fools .
Changes in culture take generations, this battle of the sexes is perpetual if the wisdom of the most widespread religion is correct.
We males might well reflect just how much terrible suffering and cruelty females have experienced over thousands of years under the rule of male power.
Currently, the issue is in a state of transition and in some ways it is worse for women just now and in others it is better.
The transition originated in the clash between what has been called the enlightenment erupting within Christendom and establishing a powerful presence within populations endowed with mass media.
Keep two facts in mind. Sex hormones are immensely powerful mind-altering substances up until recently only produced within the bodies of children transitioning into adults.
Now, they are available in pills and are widely used wherever in the world goods can be exchanged using money.
Female humans on all types of oral contraceptive medications are in a state mimicking pregnancy, minds altered to better cope with drastic changes in their bodies and imminent childbirth.
This is happening while moral restraint is waning throughout the same populations.
And here you are talking as if the problem is one of civil and criminal law.
Having married someone who joined me of her own free will, promised fidelity until parted by death and maintained a loving relationship with her during the conception, birth and growth to adulthood of our six children and worked alongside her as medical practitioners to a very needy impoverished population in rural regional Australia, I do not experience any involuntary absence of liberty or civil rights of particular significance.
I am delighted in the masculinity of my three sons and the femininity of my three daughters. I regret the creeping feminisation of general medical practice in Australia as well as the collectivist imposition of woke expectations of behaviour trying to establish a hive mind reminiscent of Mao and his little red book
<We males might well reflect just how much terrible suffering and cruelty females have experienced over thousands of years under the rule of male power.>
If anyone takes an honest look at history, both genders endured and were exposed to what we call horrendous conditions. Presentism is judging the past through the current lens of morality. Perhaps in another thousand years, the same lens will be applied to this day and age.
Your statement that only included the suffering of the female gender is a total rationalisation. It is used to justify the abuse of the male gender in this day and age.
During WW2, both Japanese and German soldiers subjected horrendous crimes to other soldiers; however, if we were to claim it is OK to abuse them for the past abuses, where will it ever end?
1) From the 11th century onward, European society absorbed influences ranging from Arabic love poetry to aristocratic courtship trends, alongside the rise of the Marian cult. This climate was further shaped by figures such as Eleanor of Aquitaine and her daughter Marie who transformed the ideal of chivalry into a code of male service to women —
2)1600, the Italian writer Lucrezia Marinella observed that women of lower social classes were often treated as superiors, while men served them like knightly retainers and beasts of burden
3)Adoration of women.
If it were true that the history of the western were the history of men oppressing women, we would expect to find some significant evidence of such oppression- of male entitlement to women’s bodies, sexual violence or indfifference to women’s pain- in literature that privileged men wrote.
We would expect that some of the most culturally influential men of their time would at least occasionally reveal their contempt for women and their pleasure in controlling them.
What we encountered instead is a massive boady of love poetry stretching back through the centuriies in which extended adoration of the woman and expression of dedicated or hopeless yearning form a major component and in which the commission of violence is presented as the height of mental malady as in Rober Brownings sinister dramatic monologue “My Last Duchess” (1842).
{Presentism is judging the past through the current lens of morality. Perhaps in another thousand years, the same lens will be applied to this day and age.}
The moral law, written in bullet points as the 10 Commandments, is many thousands of years old and has persisted unchanged all through to the present. So has widespread breach of that morality in the exercise of pride, covetousness, wrath, lust, gluttony, envy and sloth
The topic is men moaning about suffering in one jurisdiction during a small time frame and I retain the freedom to address the current discussion before us and proclaim my opinion that a monotone of "feminism" is puerile and shallow.
"We males might well reflect just how much terrible suffering and cruelty females have experienced over thousands of years under the rule of male power."
So it appears that only the historical experience of the female gender matters.
It is most likely that at some point in time we are descents of people who were once enslaved and historically being a slave meant being treated very poorly and you life was not worth very much.
The mines and collaries act removed women from working in the mines, in my book that shows consideration to the welfare of the female gender.
The factories act limited the amount of hours a woman could work, the same law did was not applied to the male gender.
Basically your statement of the terrible suffering and cruelty is aimed at emotional black mail and manipulation.
Well, as an Australian with aristocratic Angle ancestors and clan roots from Scotland, Frankish ancestors from Europe, Viking ancestors from the north and Irish Jewish survivors of a long past Eastern European pogrom I have victim and perpetrator throughout my genes.
I stand fast in accepting that human inhumanity to human knows no limit while having faith in Christianity to provide some possibilities for ameliorating some of it during my lifetime. I am responsible for the choices I have made and hope for mercy for any that have hurt others.
Care to illustrate how I have blackmailed or manipulated anyone about anything.
IT WASNT THAT LONG BEFORE THE WAR STARTED THAT FEMINISTS IN UKRAINE WERE COMPLAINING ABOUT DISCRIMINATION, BUT THEY SOON PROVED WHAT COWARDS AND LIARS THEY ARE, THEY DONT WANT EQUALITY WHEN THEY ARE TERRIFIED OF SOMETHING.
In Scotland, the situation is exacerbated by the fact that it's women who make the laws - Dorothy Bain and Lady Dorian. Hence their insistence that a woman's word takes priority as admissible evidence (and, by implication, anything a man says is probably a lie).
They don't wish to confront the fact that women can be PROCEPTIVE, and then regret it. Not if it can all be blamed on men's bestial nature, and exonerated by the feminist dogma that women never lie.
Proceptive: I had not realized there was a word which encompasses the part that a variety of attitudes and behaviours play in the female human participation in mate selection and facilitation of potential eventual sexual intercourse.
Never too old to learn, eh?
Now, how do we get these concepts into black letter law?
Special definitions are proposed for three concepts representing characteristics of female mammals when they are in estrus. Attractivity refers to the female's stimulus value in evoking sexual responses by the male. Proceptivity connotes various reactions by the female toward the male which constitute her assumption of initiative in establishing or maintaining sexual interaction. Receptivity is defined in terms of female responses necessary and sufficient for the male's success in achieving intravaginal ejaculation.
https://financialdomesticabuse.substack.com/p/when-the-evidence-isnt-examined?r=83df4j&utm_medium=ios
Bettina: There's a fake profile with your name, @bettinaa -- just FYI you might want to ask it be taken down. I just messaged it, thinking it was you. I messaged because there is an unusual person commenting on my post who seems a little unhinged: Peter Andrew Nolan. He mentioned you knew about his case. He also wished violence on women and girls and was angry at "women journalists" for "ignoring" him. I blocked him as he seemed crazy and i don't write on gender issues. I just wondered if he was a real person or a troll-bot.
In Scotland since UNFAIR TRIALS became the norm we don’t know who in prison is:
- a monster
- a decent man who met a vindictive woman who became intent on destroying him.
Monetary rewards is a factor as in the UK compensation is paid out for REPORTING sexual assault, no evidence of physical or mental injury is required. Multiple compensation claims from the same individual are not investigated. It’s a VERY lucrative business for telling lies.
The false conviction rates make THIS proposal by GB Home Secretary all the more terrifying.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/crmkv3jezzdo
Presumably, under Kant's Categorical Imperative, the same 'voluntary' programme will be rolled out to female teachers who 'seduce' boys under their authority..?
No.?? Silly me.
I forgot that women's prisons are to be abolished.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/shabana-mahmood-labour-prison-women-close-b2618123.html
Rape is sexual intercourse without consent. Obviously, if the female didn't really enjoy it or feels sleazy the morning after, she knows she did not "really" consent so she was raped. How vapid these modern delicate female flowers are!
This is a new form of discrimination and abuse that cannot be overlooked. I am a woman and I cannot believe that there are people from my gender that are this destructive and believe that they are the above the law and should rule over everyone else. This is not okay. No one gender is better or worse than the other. My colleague and I just did an article called When Women Are the Abusers - The Invisible Crisis of Male Domestic Violence Victims. This article notes over 30 high profile national and international cases of women abusing and murdering. As of this week, there are at least 2 more cases of women in the news abusing and murdering.
#ctleg, #ctlaw, #CT, #Connecticut, #CGA
#legislation, #government #politics, #policy, #humanrights, #democracy #Congress, #Senate, #Advocacy, #civilrights, #science
Great comment , I’m reminded of a case from Geraldton, West Australia , a woman doctor had beaten her husband to death with a hammer as be lay in bed , she then claimed to be the “victim” , unbelievably the justice system believed her and she got off very lightly , out of jail only 6 months after her trial.
Feminists are try to modify the evidentiary standards in our courts ("beyond reasonable doubt" in our criminal courts and the low-bar "balance of probability" in our civil (which includes the family court)) to "𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘦𝘷𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘪𝘴 𝘯𝘦𝘦𝘥𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘴𝘶𝘱𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘵 𝘰𝘳𝘥𝘦𝘳𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘫𝘶𝘥𝘨𝘦 /𝘮𝘢𝘨𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘦 /𝘳𝘦𝘨𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘳 𝘥𝘦𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘸𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥 𝘮𝘢𝘬𝘦 𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘤𝘢𝘴𝘦 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘶𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘨𝘰𝘵 𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘳𝘪𝘢𝘭."
The reduction of the evidentiary standard in our courts will normalise what happened in my children’s family law case (I call it "my children's case" as they were on trial as to whether or not they would be allowed to have a meaningful relationship with their father)
From the start of my children’s family law trial, I had freely admitted to the one instance of physical domestic violence (no physical injuries) between my then wife and me.
Even though this incident had occured 6 years before the trial and my ex-wife had stated that no other physical DV incidents had occured, the judge and barrister for the icl treated it as if it had occured in the past few months and that one incident clear demonstrated a "pattern of behaviour" as the barrister surmised.
I was first on the witness stand and was questioned about this incident by the judge who asked "did you squeeze?" I responded with an emphatical "No!" and a scowl. In his orders "Reasons", the judge changed this "No" to a "Yes" and to rub my face in his misandristic evidence tampering, he add for good measure "then he smiled." The audio and transcript still clearly have "No" recorded, though other recordings were interfered with by this judge.
When I cross-examined my ex-wife when she was in the witness box, she categorically denied that the incident had ever occured; she sort to avoided being questioned about her deliberate ongoing provocation that led to me responding inappropriately.
The judge in his reasons noted this denial only as "the wife spoke otherwise" and then speculated that this "might have been another incident (raised 2.5 years earlier, but not at trial)" and concluded that his surmising was correct.
This judge effectively deported my children; Australian citizens and Habitual Residents since birth and claiming that the 18 months that they were Internationally Abducted outweighed the 32 months they had been back in Australia after 2 Hague Convention Return Orders (under The Hague Convention, Habitual Residence is 12 or more months continuous residence in a country) or the years before abduction growing up in Australia.
Further, this judge would deliberately sabotage my "lines of questioning" by, without waiting for the person in witness box to reply, interjecting from the bench and speculating as to what the answer would likely be. That is, telling that person how to reply to keep the narrative on track.
The barrister took the approach of carefully leading my ex-wife with question to which she could verbatim regurgitate the implied required response to his question.
Even prior to handing down his deportation orders, this judge was well aware that my wife viewed compliance with court orders as "optional" and that, once the mother removed herself and the children from the Australian jurisdiction (thereby deliberately placing her beyond Australian law), she could have the Australian orders annulled by a court in her jurisdiction, which she did so as to avoid spending $15K annually flying 4 children to Australia each year.
One could say without contradiction, that these orders are yet another example of orders hand down in the family court that the judge knows full well won't be complied with nor expects them to be complied with.
The bizarre anti male culture of the justice system cannot last , women should bear this in mind and remember the story of the boy who cried wolf. Pretending to be the victim works for a while but people wise up and things can change quickly .
ACT ~ 20 times more than 5 years ago? A factoid created to support the feminist narrative; the family court also does this to justify more misogynisticly biased changes to the Family Law Act..
Even with the 3.5 times growth rate, even more meritless cases will now be going to trial without investigation and lacking creditable evidence. This influx of cases will cause longer delays before the case is heard, denying the accused of a timely (and fair) trial.
No doubt when the the courts start throwing these flimsy cases out, the feminists will shrill "the courts/judges are misogynists" and demand further reductions in the evidentiary standards, broadening of definitions and increased power for the prosecutor to have evidence excluded that does not support a conviction.
“I was on remand in jail for close to a year, negotiating with the Department of Public Prosecutions and waiting for my trial, in horrible, smelly old jails full of roaches and scummy people. No fun at all.”
Reading the above account, there is a strong indication that this man was deliberately set up.
From my understanding, until the feminists achieve 100% conviction rate of men who are accused of sexual assault, they will not stop.
Not surprising this is happening in Scotland the land of the “ Celtic women “ the Pagan goddesses who still resent Christianity as a tool of the dreaded “patriarchy “ The most strident anti -male feminists have mostly been women of Celtic ancestry and still are , they’re in power now , parliament , senior government , the judiciary, even big business.
Their hatred of men knows no bounds , to them it’s ok to jail an innocent man , because he’s a
“Man” and that’s a crime in itself to these demented fools .
We will see an increase in male abortions before it gets to that…. Why allow a male to commit the offence of birth as a male…
Changes in culture take generations, this battle of the sexes is perpetual if the wisdom of the most widespread religion is correct.
We males might well reflect just how much terrible suffering and cruelty females have experienced over thousands of years under the rule of male power.
Currently, the issue is in a state of transition and in some ways it is worse for women just now and in others it is better.
The transition originated in the clash between what has been called the enlightenment erupting within Christendom and establishing a powerful presence within populations endowed with mass media.
Keep two facts in mind. Sex hormones are immensely powerful mind-altering substances up until recently only produced within the bodies of children transitioning into adults.
Now, they are available in pills and are widely used wherever in the world goods can be exchanged using money.
Female humans on all types of oral contraceptive medications are in a state mimicking pregnancy, minds altered to better cope with drastic changes in their bodies and imminent childbirth.
This is happening while moral restraint is waning throughout the same populations.
And here you are talking as if the problem is one of civil and criminal law.
LOL A feminist appologist drone. Stop trying to justify your voluntary loss of emancipation.
Having married someone who joined me of her own free will, promised fidelity until parted by death and maintained a loving relationship with her during the conception, birth and growth to adulthood of our six children and worked alongside her as medical practitioners to a very needy impoverished population in rural regional Australia, I do not experience any involuntary absence of liberty or civil rights of particular significance.
I am delighted in the masculinity of my three sons and the femininity of my three daughters. I regret the creeping feminisation of general medical practice in Australia as well as the collectivist imposition of woke expectations of behaviour trying to establish a hive mind reminiscent of Mao and his little red book
<We males might well reflect just how much terrible suffering and cruelty females have experienced over thousands of years under the rule of male power.>
If anyone takes an honest look at history, both genders endured and were exposed to what we call horrendous conditions. Presentism is judging the past through the current lens of morality. Perhaps in another thousand years, the same lens will be applied to this day and age.
Your statement that only included the suffering of the female gender is a total rationalisation. It is used to justify the abuse of the male gender in this day and age.
During WW2, both Japanese and German soldiers subjected horrendous crimes to other soldiers; however, if we were to claim it is OK to abuse them for the past abuses, where will it ever end?
1) From the 11th century onward, European society absorbed influences ranging from Arabic love poetry to aristocratic courtship trends, alongside the rise of the Marian cult. This climate was further shaped by figures such as Eleanor of Aquitaine and her daughter Marie who transformed the ideal of chivalry into a code of male service to women —
2)1600, the Italian writer Lucrezia Marinella observed that women of lower social classes were often treated as superiors, while men served them like knightly retainers and beasts of burden
3)Adoration of women.
If it were true that the history of the western were the history of men oppressing women, we would expect to find some significant evidence of such oppression- of male entitlement to women’s bodies, sexual violence or indfifference to women’s pain- in literature that privileged men wrote.
We would expect that some of the most culturally influential men of their time would at least occasionally reveal their contempt for women and their pleasure in controlling them.
What we encountered instead is a massive boady of love poetry stretching back through the centuriies in which extended adoration of the woman and expression of dedicated or hopeless yearning form a major component and in which the commission of violence is presented as the height of mental malady as in Rober Brownings sinister dramatic monologue “My Last Duchess” (1842).
{Presentism is judging the past through the current lens of morality. Perhaps in another thousand years, the same lens will be applied to this day and age.}
The moral law, written in bullet points as the 10 Commandments, is many thousands of years old and has persisted unchanged all through to the present. So has widespread breach of that morality in the exercise of pride, covetousness, wrath, lust, gluttony, envy and sloth
The topic is men moaning about suffering in one jurisdiction during a small time frame and I retain the freedom to address the current discussion before us and proclaim my opinion that a monotone of "feminism" is puerile and shallow.
"We males might well reflect just how much terrible suffering and cruelty females have experienced over thousands of years under the rule of male power."
So it appears that only the historical experience of the female gender matters.
It is most likely that at some point in time we are descents of people who were once enslaved and historically being a slave meant being treated very poorly and you life was not worth very much.
The mines and collaries act removed women from working in the mines, in my book that shows consideration to the welfare of the female gender.
The factories act limited the amount of hours a woman could work, the same law did was not applied to the male gender.
Basically your statement of the terrible suffering and cruelty is aimed at emotional black mail and manipulation.
Well, as an Australian with aristocratic Angle ancestors and clan roots from Scotland, Frankish ancestors from Europe, Viking ancestors from the north and Irish Jewish survivors of a long past Eastern European pogrom I have victim and perpetrator throughout my genes.
I stand fast in accepting that human inhumanity to human knows no limit while having faith in Christianity to provide some possibilities for ameliorating some of it during my lifetime. I am responsible for the choices I have made and hope for mercy for any that have hurt others.
Care to illustrate how I have blackmailed or manipulated anyone about anything.
When will men wake up to the fact that we are under attack by feminists and they are doing everything they can to destroy the male gender!
They speak quietly so nobody can hear them and subject them to the pillory.
Publicly pillorying men
https://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=21871
Feminism is not about equality
It is an ideology based on nothing but hatred of men and boys and is really all about power and SPECIAL STATUS FOR WOMEN IN ALL THINGS
Feminism is the largest hate movement the world has ever seen
They hate 1/2 of world’s entire population
Feminists also hate Fathers and Families and the females who don't follow their ideology
once again proof that feminism is just an anti male hate movement and nothing to do with equality.
We saw modern feminist "equality" in action at the start of the invasion of Ukraine; men and boys to the front lines, Women and Girls to the airports.
IT WASNT THAT LONG BEFORE THE WAR STARTED THAT FEMINISTS IN UKRAINE WERE COMPLAINING ABOUT DISCRIMINATION, BUT THEY SOON PROVED WHAT COWARDS AND LIARS THEY ARE, THEY DONT WANT EQUALITY WHEN THEY ARE TERRIFIED OF SOMETHING.
In Scotland, the situation is exacerbated by the fact that it's women who make the laws - Dorothy Bain and Lady Dorian. Hence their insistence that a woman's word takes priority as admissible evidence (and, by implication, anything a man says is probably a lie).
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c977d35l7mjo
Paving the way for the kangaroo courts which they hope to impose.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-59151540
Of course, when women are the jurisprudence class, they'll want to hide true female nature.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26592455/
They don't wish to confront the fact that women can be PROCEPTIVE, and then regret it. Not if it can all be blamed on men's bestial nature, and exonerated by the feminist dogma that women never lie.
Proceptive: I had not realized there was a word which encompasses the part that a variety of attitudes and behaviours play in the female human participation in mate selection and facilitation of potential eventual sexual intercourse.
Never too old to learn, eh?
Now, how do we get these concepts into black letter law?
Special definitions are proposed for three concepts representing characteristics of female mammals when they are in estrus. Attractivity refers to the female's stimulus value in evoking sexual responses by the male. Proceptivity connotes various reactions by the female toward the male which constitute her assumption of initiative in establishing or maintaining sexual interaction. Receptivity is defined in terms of female responses necessary and sufficient for the male's success in achieving intravaginal ejaculation.
It's probably conversion of progesterone to the super-androgen DHT by the 'back-door' androgen pathway that's helping with female proceptivity.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Androgen_backdoor_pathway
Progesterone causes release of female pheromones.
https://chemistry-europe.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cbic.201700224
If ejaculation successful, progesterone is a big help to sperm motility.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0303720720302525
The effect of copulins on male perception of attractiveness of female faces.
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1474704916643328
It's all a form of entrapment, really!
None of it is likely to stand up in a court of law.
That's interesting, Warren. Are you living in Scotland?
Sure am! It's a place that makes life worth living. Like so many other countries, it does have its problems, though...