I was at a science forum in the chat section when a prominent celebrity came up who had been accused of a sex crime. I said I thought he was guilty.

Discussion arose whether it was improper for a person not on a jury to have an opinion as to the guilt or innocence of a person. I said that that presumption of innocence was only incumbent upon officers of the court and the jurors themselves. Private citizens could think as they would.

Then I cited experience that I had had as a victim advocate, saying that most jurors took very seriously to presumption of innocence and the idea of reasonable doubt. It is actually quite difficult to get convictions for sex crimes.

I said that it was sad that adults so often disbelieved children when in fact children lie no frequently than adults and that the younger that they are they more seriously they take the idea that they must tell the truth in court.

Suddenly the site was invaded by pedophiles. There were about five of them -- self-professed pedophiles -- who claimed various things, such as

Looking at child porn cause no harm to children

Children actually wanted sex with adults

Girls of about 12 need sexual initiation by adult men

But (most of all!) they would never hurt a child. Sex with children was love and not hurt.

Naturally, I fought these ideas and the discussion got quite heated.

This site allowed PMs and I got a rather threatening PM from one of the pedophiles. He claimed that it was the fault of old feminists like me that young girls were more wary and no longer understood the gift that he was offering by intiating them into sex.

Now that was CREEPY.

Smith's bore of an ignore list

Is surely forthcoming...

"I suppose there might be some men who buy into this, but most guys just like the thrill of seeing something not intended for display."

Shouldn't "something intended for display" be enough? After all, a guy can get as much of that as he wants without one-quarter of the risk and hassle of going after "unintended display," right? AKA is right--the real charge scum get out of upskirting is that they get to take from women what they can't ask for...and congratulate themselves for being smarter than those "bitches."

Some of them like to do it themselves.

This is a BIG LIE by Brightstar, who ignoring the fact that there have been women who have posted at Broadsheet about being raped by their fathers. A recent one was a stripper who talked about the molestation by her father beginning when she was five and culminating in rape.

I NEVER claimed it never happens that men rape their daughters. I only claimed that you set up a phony dichotomy by only focusing on the men, LIKE FEMINISTS so commonly do.

Fathers have given their daughters to other men in poker games, for Christ's sake.

And you women continue to keep sleeping with these sort of white trash men, pumping out more of these bastards' broods, then wondering why the world is not improving.

All statistics about sexual assaults indicate that men do this far, far more than women, yet you will see these so-called men's rights activists repeatedly try to minimize this or to act as if there is some sort of comparable behavior by women. There simply is not.

I do not believe phony baloney statistics from a society consistently arrayed against all men, as the U.S. legal system is.

Again, focusing on ALL assaults, women are as prevalent at being the perpetrators as are men. Astounding when you consider than men are somewhat stronger on average than are women.

Yes, there are women who sexually seduce their sons. They are horrible women but they are rare. What happens to those sons? Anna Salter gives a hint in her book Predators. Sexual assault by a mother is in the history of some of the most violent, brutal, and murderous rapists.

Sexual assault of children by adults should get a great deal more attention than it does. Why doesn't it?

I agree, and why only the focus on men doing the assaulting?

Why are all these female teachers assaulting boys STILL not in jail anyway?

Why DO women get a free pass?

why are all the white trash abusive mothers not being systematically thrown in jail for their abuses of their children? We never hear about this, do we? but we know it is very common among the lower classes when we bother to LOOK at the empirical data WITHOUT the presupposition that only men are bad and that only women are good.

Feminism has destroyed any sense in society that a perpetrator's gender is largely a non-issue and that both sexes engage in all manner and sort of illegal abusive activities. Another reason to despise feminism for its focus only on the men as perpetrators.

IF YOU were accused of being a potential criminal by society, would you TOO not become at greater risk of playing up only to the level people expect of you?

Yet this is PRECISELY the 'game' (and it IS a calculated game feminists play against men) that feminists are playing by trying to DEMONIZE ALL MEN as potential criminals.

You women ought to be really, truly ashamed or yourselves. No men call you women out on this cynical shit, but really, it is far past time to begin doing so.

Let's, for once, LEVEL that gender playing field, huh?

Ever thought what happens when child molestation cases are actually taken to trial. Usually something bad for the child. Their testimony is a sort of reliving of the events. Then, often, the jury sets the molester free. Poll the jury! You want to know what sort of juror often is most likely to refuse to convict: The male juror.

Right, because in many cases, the molesters were THEMSELVES assaulted or molested by somebody. Perpetration of crime generation after generation.

Train all women to avoid these assholes, to quit opening their legs for them, and you would make a massive dent in reducing crimes of all sorts.

But this is just too damn difficult for women, and besides, how could you women demonize the men if suddenly all the men that remained were good honest people.

You women could no longer guilt trip men into giving you an easy life, while whining about how difficult it is to be a woman, could you?