-1=e^ipi

Cybercoma, if you want to argue the merits of moving towards a guilty until proven innocent beyond reasonable doubt system then I am open to that. However, please don't pretend it is the same thing as innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

Excuse? I'm saying that there is inadequate information.

How do you know she did not consent to the sex? You don't. You are trying to pretend, using your tea meme, that others in this thread are taking the position that they don't think a person can retract consent later on. That is a strawman argument. Rather, they are taking the position that there is insufficient evidence to conclude that the guy was guilty beyond reasonable doubt.

Can you elaborate on what you want me to elaborate on if the link wasn't enough?

The judge cannot be considered unbiased. Citing feminists that think all sex is rape, claiming in the past that "Marriage, in the legal sense only, is a purchase. The buyer is the man, who commits himself for the rest of his life to provide food, shelter, clothing and medical attention in return for... the exclusive use of his bride's vagina.", that law does not support women enough, etc. He's also been known to commit judicial misconduct in the past by altering transcripts. Perhaps he wanted to be known as the noble chivalrous judge who protected womyn against the evil rape culture. After all, womyn are always innocent and men are always guilty. We already know that courts are heavily biased against men, be it child custody, divorces or the sentencing gap (men have 62% longer sentences even after controlling for other factors http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2144002).I guess now they want to make it so that a woman's testimony counts for more than a man's; sort of like the opposite as in Sharia where a man's testimony counts for twice as much as a woman's.

What's really interesting is that the girl has a pretty strong incentive to lie about being raped in this case. 1. Get back at her boyfriend for breaking up with her. 2. Advance her career. She lives in Toronto and does gender studies in 2016. Essentially the entire field is a victim culture where the more of a victim you can claim to be the greater your ability to move ahead academically. Now she can do her PhD in rape, appear on various news stories / talk shows about how she was a rape victim and how the justice system needs to change more to listen and believe women more, she'll be more likely to get a professor position to teach and research gender studies, etc. Two birds with 1 stone. Or maybe she's telling the truth. I don't know.

"You cited his version, but not hers, -1=e^ipi. Why?" I provided a brief 1 sentence summary for both of them and provided a link. I'm not going to rewrite everything, that is what the link is for. Are you referring to the comments? And judges can be biased and make wrong decisions. That's not that bad of an idea.

That could mean a number of different things though. The way I see it, the guy isn't innocent beyond reasonable doubt, but he's not guilty beyond reasonable doubt either.

But male genital mutilation is perfectly acceptable...

Nah. Trump will just complain that the election is rigged and that the polls are fixed by the establishment. After he loses in a landslide he will proclaim that he was cheated and that he actually won.

What? I thought you were a feminist. Don't you know that we are supposed to ban bossy? LINK

https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2016/07/21/myths-of-rape-should-be-dispelled-says-judge-in-mandi-gray-case.html So essentially you have two people that are dating. The girl texts the guy 'come drink and then we can have hot sex'. The guy claims that he tried to break up with the girl, but then they have consolation sex. The girl claims that they had sex that wasn't consensual. He said vs she said. Text messages are the only other evidence. Judge rules, while quoting feminist poetry, that the guy is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Btw, the girl is a PhD student in gender studies and changed her research from Women in Prison to Rape due to this case. ... ... ... This isn't a joke. Good thing I'm an asexual virgin that doesn't drink. VIDEO LINK

I hate SJWs as much as a lot of people, but you Trump supporters have a very bizarre definition of political correctness. Essentially it's anything you disagree with, from what I gather.

I don't know what you want exactly. I make the claim that some people in the social justice community are trying to challenge mainstream views of pedophilia. I then give you examples.

Btw, O'Leary has said that he doesn't mind if people have sex with a goat. So I guess O'Leary is pro bestiality.

Examples: http://www.salon.com/2015/09/21/im_a_pedophile_but_not_a_monster/ http://gawker.com/5941037/born-this-way-sympathy-and-science-for-those-who--want-to-have-sex-with-children/

Some people in the social justice community are challenging the mainstream attitude towards pedophiles.

too bad there is no classical liberal party.

pansexual 'not limited in sexual choice with regard to biological sex, gender, or gender identity.' intersex 'the abnormal condition of being intermediate between male and female; hermaphroditism.'

B - bisexual, P - pansexual and I - intersex are already in the alphabet soup.

Yes, but according to the CBC, this comment is racist. Comments like these are why CBC decided to get rid of all comments on native issues. Can't have people arguing that people should be equal and that the reserve system contributes to poverty, it gets in the way of the narrative they wish to peddle.

Indigenous men are murdered at over twice the rate as Indigenous women. So why weren't they included in this inquiry? Sexism. People care far more about violence against women than violence against men.

Female voices appear less threatening. That's why it's more common for companies to use female voices such as Siri and Cortana.

This is a good comparison. Also, Margret Thatcher didn't go on about being female. And correct me if I am wrong, but I don't think Christie Clarke or Julia Gillard did either.