• 0 Posts
  • 23 Comments
Joined 1 month ago
cake
Cake day: July 1st, 2025

help-circle






  • This is a safety feature of women social groups for time immemorial. It’s a piece of how we survived prior to the last 50 years, and it continued as we moved forward into the era of liberation. We talk to each other.

    I realize the “guy code” is one of silence. Cheating? Bros won’t say anything or warn anyone, by this code. In fact, the opposite is demanded by that code. Woman do the opposite, that is how the woman code works. I’ve witnessed fallout in friend groups when these diametrically opposed codes meet on regards to another friend. Apparently, having lunch with the cheated on woman and letting her know what is happening is applauded by women and enraging to men.

    The piece regarding cheating is about integrity and treating people right in addition to safety. The rest of it is usually just about safety.

    We survived millennia between being treated like prized horses. uteruses/vaginas with life support systems attached, and animals to be beaten, by talking to each other. Warning each other. Helping each other, where able.

    The anger here, from you, is 100% expected, but the ordinary nature of that anger doesn’t make women wrong for exposing safety concerns in the dating pool. Given the myriad of diseases, including the incredible comeback of syphilis the last couple years, cheating is also a safety concern. Cheating should be exposed, always.



  • I’m old, so I’m more familiar with before me too than after. I believe a piece of what she is trying to say is the doubt that permeates any initial accusation. Doubt was the standard approach to any mention of rape or assault for decades.

    Back in college, in the 90s, a good friend was followed home from a party. She made it home, thought she was safe. While she was showering in her basement (house) apartment, she looked up to see hands and a nose pressed to the frosted glass of the window, trying to see in. She called the police. A pair of cops showed up and the first thing they asked wasn’t: are you ok. Or. Did you get a good look at the guy. No. They asked her if she’d been drinking tonight. Then: Well, what were you wearing when you walked home from this party?

    Footprints and knee prints in the dirt consistent with someone tramping into the flower bed to kneel down by her bathroom window. Hand prints and a nose grease smear on the glass. No attempt to investigate further. Chastised to drink less. She was not drunk, yet this was the takeaway message of that encounter instead of her safety. Encounters like these regarding the sexual safety of women were so common in the 90s.

    The salient point here is this post likely is not about flipping the innocent until proven guilty narrative. This is about the preliminary circumstances that would lead into a case and taking the woman’s safety seriously instead of ignoring perpetrators who leave evidence behind.

    If no one listens to you or takes you seriously, or avoids asking the relevant questions, that is a problem. Worse it’s a problem that was the status quo for decades.

    So, when OP says maybe we should listen to trumps accusers that’s what it likely means. To listen. Not to flip the innocent until proven guilty narrative.











  • Zephorah@discuss.onlinetoMemes@lemmy.mlPonder This
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    18 days ago

    No. Matthew Crooks went after him because of his suspicion of Trump being in the Epstein Files.

    Rosie was brought by Trump, in association with a heinously treasonous idea, to distract from Trump’s association with the Epstein Files.

    Distraction is Trump’s preferred tool when he’s scared or grifting.