The left is in hysterics because Kavanaugh could be a deciding vote on the SCOTUS bench should abortion reappear on the docket, and he was smeared with false rape accusations. What does that have in common with the abortion topic? Because the only reason why abortion made it to the Supreme Court was because a woman, who claimed to be “gang raped”, wanted and couldn’t get one easily.

The year was 1969. Norma McCorvey was 22, pregnant and unwed when she approached an attorney about wanting an abortion. The Dallas woman didn’t get one, but four years later, her lawsuit fighting Texas’ ban on abortion reached the Supreme Court and made the procedure legal across the United States.

“Miss Norma” was a complicated figure in the abortion debate. McCorvey, who once identified as lesbian, admitted that she had lied about being gang-raped so she could end her pregnancy.
— Dallas Morning News, 2/19/17

It sure was “complicated”.

During those times, there were morals and standards in the United States. Being unmarried and knocked-up was not as socially acceptable and enabled as it is today. There was a stigma and using the “rape” card provided the appropriate cover and absolution from personal responsibility.

It’s not clear who specifically McCorvey accused but the aftermath is now well known. The Supreme Court found the existing anti-abortion laws to be unconstitutional, women subsequently got the right to have abortions on demand, and millions of babies are killed in the womb to this day… all because of a lie.

Sarah Weddington, the Austin, Texas, lawyer who represented McCorvey, told United Press International Tuesday, ‘The issue of how Jane Roe became pregnant is irrelevant to the case. There was nothing in any of the papers filed with the court or in any of the oral arguments made that related to the cause of the pregnancy.’
— United Press International, 9/8/87

A woman lies about a rape. A political goal is met.

McCorvey told syndicated newspaper columnist Carl T. Rowan that she had fabricated her account of being raped by three men and a woman in 1969 because she had hoped to circumvent a 100-year-old Texas law that banned abortions except when the woman’s life was in danger. The transcript of the interview doesn’t make clear why Ms. McCorvey thought that an account of rape would necessarily help win exemption from, or overturn, a law that allowed abortion only to protect a woman’s life.

“I don’t know” is probably the most overused response when someone is asked why they made a false rape accusation.

According to a news release issued by WUSA about the interview, Sarah Weddington, one of the two lawyers who took the case to the Supreme Court, said she had never “touched the issue of rape and only emphasized the question of whether the Constitution gives to the state or leaves to a woman the questions of what she can or must do with her body.”

Telling the truth, heaven forbid, might have poked an ethical hole in the case.

Kate Michelman, executive director of the National Abortion Rights Action League, said in an interview today that Ms. McCorvey’s disclosure ”should not cloud the discussion about the right of a woman to terminate her pregnancy. “It was her life circumstances that created the conditions that mitigated against her being straightforward….”
— New York Times, 9/9/87

McCorvey was the “anonymous plaintiff” in the landmark case that made it to the Supreme Court and there was no written mention of her being “raped” in the lawsuit. That aided in her not having to testify under oath.

How convenient and, again, familiar.

While rape was never an issue in the case, public opinion was considered swayed by the media accounts detailing what McCorvey claimed was a gang rape by three men and a woman while she worked for a circus in Georgia.

Imagine the public opinion had there been a 24-hour media and Internet oh-so ready to repeat her lie. McCorvey would be ready with tears-on-cue, playing on the emotions of the public, invoking the horrors of rape, and getting a high court to create a “right” superseding and thus denying “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” to millions of children who never made it out of their mothers alive.

Yes, there are those today who forgave Norma McCorvey. She was baptized and went on a crusade, mostly ignored by the liberal media, to inform the American people of the lie that created “Roe vs. Wade”. But the damage was done and a false rape accusation sanctioned the wholesale slaughter of millions of American children.

Being Jane Roe has been a heavy burden. I remember 10 years ago driving past a school playground and seeing these empty swings. I freaked out. I thought: ‘All the playgrounds are empty, all the children are dead and it’s because of me.’
— Norma McCorvey, 1995

McCorvey may have sought some semblance of redemption before her judgment day, but she is no hero and today another false accusation of rape has been used as abortion-on-demand could soon be at risk for the left and all the nonprofits that have made millions of dollars promoting the killing of more than 60 million babies in the United States alone, almost a third (18 million) alone black.

Norma McCorvey was quietly eulogized by the left when she died in 2017; she was a heroine because of her abortion achievement while the lie that got her there was omitted for convenience.

She was also a heroine, eulogized by the right, as she turned on the pro-choice movement.

The Brett Kavanaugh Supreme Court confirmation process has brought two very evil topics into the public light. One being abortion and the other false rape accusations.

And in both cases, liberal Democrats would have you believe neither are big deals at all.

Three Reasons Why You Can’t Find a Guy
Ask Anna: Why can’t I find a man?
It Really Is You & Not Him: 10 Reasons You Can’t Find a Good Man
20 Reasons You Don’t Have a Boyfriend
Why You Can’t Find A Boyfriend Even When You’re Trying Really Hard

One of the main contributors was the loud feminist mantra, “I don’t need a man” that left some women with a fist held high in one hand and a smoldering bra in the other, while other women just threw up their hands in the frustration of self-inflicted sabotage.

We can only imagine the conversations that were had between parents and their young male sons who just left the nest for a college campus. How many responsible parents warned those sons to be VERY careful with any female student they would come in contact with, all the precautions that would need to be considered before having any contact with one that could possibly be a love interest, and the possible negative ramifications of such an interest that could follow them for the rest of their lives.

Suppose a woman wakes up in the morning after a sexual encounter and then labels it sexual assault, to the surprise of her sexual partner. Did this woman regret having sex and then say she was a victim so she doesn’t have to come to terms with her actions? Is she lying about being sexually assaulted so people don’t think she is a slut?
— UNC Healthy Heels, 11/7/13

If you have to pose this as a defensive scenario, there’s an inconvenient element of truth that needed to be initially acknowledged.

But we’re told we must #BelieveWomen….

After the stigma placed on men with the implementation of Title IX on campus and more recently the #MeToo movement, how long before women (again) start whining because fewer men are giving them the time of day, let alone a date or assistance in a workplace. Men are now rightfully being very careful.

Women, as portrayed by Democrats, their media and activists, are not looking very attractive and we don’t just mean physically. They’re coming off as unhinged and few men find that kind of potential drama as a positive draw. A lot of these women also appear to be on a revenge mission which leaves any man in contact with them in potential jeopardy, which also translates to the workplace or any space that men and women cohabitate.

Prior to #MeToo, cautious male supervisors would always leave an office door open when talking to a female, equal or subordinate. How many employers have had to absorb the expense of creating really cool offices with glass walls; not because of the attractive aesthetics but to protect themselves from potential accusations of what may or may not have been said or done behind an opaque wall or closed door?

As in most movements that are not well-thought through, there are serious ramifications for impulsive action. Sure, some of these women will find solace within the sisterhood, declare themselves bisexual so they can achieve immediate gratification, but for those who don’t swing that way, the isolation will grow and the frustration will again become a vocal rallying cry.

This time, it’s a different world.

During the Gloria Steinem days of feminist empowerment, it was all about recognition and independence. She and others also claimed to be speaking for all women. Today, #MeToo is all about payback and they claim to be speaking for all women. The problem this time is that some of these women have husbands, brothers, sons and others who are potential targets of those who have agendas and personal issues, mixed with that nasty lack of conscience. They’ll punish any man who rejects them, didn’t reward them as they saw fit, and in the case of a potential Supreme Court justice who could potentially hamper their ability to do what they want with their bodies (and babies within).

Again, things involving the human condition tend to be cyclical. #MeToo women are using their movement to punish men who they claim abused them. They’ve also cast a wide net and have indicted all men as potential sexual abusers. Democrats are using the Kavanaugh confirmation as midterm election topic, many in the electorate are being justifiably repulsed, and fewer men will hold a door open for a woman, let alone vote for one and her offending political party.

The “Why can’t I find a man?” public whining will begin again. This time, there will be a response because of everything #MeToo.

“No, thanks.”

UPDATE

It took exactly two months.

An infrastructure-investing manager says he won’t meet with a female employee in rooms that don’t have windows; in addition, he “keeps his distance in elevators.” Another man, in private equity, has a new, self-imposed rule that says he’s not allowed to have a business dinner with any women who are 35 or younger. (Apparently, after 35, there’s no risk of doing anything appropriate, as women turn into old hags.)

I think Bess Levin meant “doing anything inappropriate” but correcting a woman’s grammar is probably a bad thing.

The horror stories continue. An investment adviser who oversees roughly 100 employees said he started to reconsider having one-on-ones with junior females. Others are refusing to sit next to female colleagues on flights and booking hotel rooms on different floors during work trips. #MeToo, according to David Bahnsen, a former managing director at Morgan Stanley, is “creating a sense of walking on eggshells.” Men, employment attorney Stephen Zweig told Bloomberg, are concerned about “a false accusation,” and “fear what they cannot control.”

Remember how many times we were all told false accusations are “rare”?

Well, it looks like men have been listening and are now responding accordingly.

Avoiding women at all costs doesn’t just make the men of Wall Street look like weird Mike Pences who apparently can’t control themselves in the presence of the devil sex. It also has a damaging effect on the careers of the women they’re shunning for fear of being accused of sexual harassment.
— Vanity Fair, 12/3/18

Women celebrated sticking it to the men and now men are looking to avoid them like the plague.

Happy now?

Here’s an unpopular opinion: I’m actually not at all concerned about innocent men losing their jobs over false sexual assault/harassment allegations.
— Emily Linden, Teen Vogue columnist

Emily’s time will come and she’ll initially be horrified that something so unfair and damaging could ever happen to HER. Karma always creates that ironic opportunity for honest introspection.

Despite many men spending years in prison because women either sought personal attention or needed to provide their cheatin’ selves an alibi, the topic of false accusations has received scant, selective attention because too many of the accused men are deemed insignificant.

In Harper Lee’s novel To Kill a Mockingbird, an all-white jury convicts an innocent black man of raping a white woman in a small 1930s southern town, despite the efforts his lawyer who defies the town’s lynch-mob mentality and proves the victim’s story to be false. It’s a new century, a sequel has just come out – and we still have men being falsely convicted of rape despite the evidence. This time with leftist’s staffing the lynch mobs.
— False rape accusations are common

That is, until it happened to a judge.

I am raising $1,000,000.00 reward for anyone of Dr. Fords Beach Friends to come forward and expose her FRAUD and lies about Judge Kavanaugh.
— John Stafford Facebook post, 9/29/18

Unfortunately, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas didn’t have the benefit of social media “likes” during his 1991 confirmation hearings so we’ll never know if anyone would have started a GoFundMe campaign on his behalf, but false accusations were lucrative and icon status-creating for Anita Hill and they sure will be for Christine Blasey Ford as long as we’re told to #BelieveWomen and they know it.

Too many men have lost reputations and some are still languishing in prison cells because women lied about being sexually assaulted for a variety of narcissistic reasons, and aided by #BelieveSurvivors activist public attorneys who callously disregarded exculpatory evidence, amp up charges with possible lengthy sentences so lesser plea bargains are accepted. The more people put away, powerful high-paying judgeships are the shiny-thing lure.

Massachusetts prosecutors have violated defendants’ rights to a fair trial regularly and without punishment, even as wrongfully convicted victims of tainted prosecutions have spent years in prison before being freed, decades of court rulings show. Some prosecutors failed to turn over important evidence to defense attorneys or didn’t disclose information bearing negatively on witness credibility, judges said. Others misrepresented evidence in their closing statements to the court.

At least seven prosecutors whose behavior prompted courts to reverse convictions went on to higher posts. Some became judges and district attorneys.
— WGBH, 4/3/16

Must be nice to be liberal and devoid of conscience.

It’s again sad to note how many innocent “ordinary people” have to suffer devastating injustice until someone of “importance” suffers the same plight. All of a sudden, it’s an emergency worthy of attention and immediate action.

Chalk this up to yet another example of liberal shortsightedness. Judge Brett Kavanaugh may have been a nonpartisan before the Supreme Court confirmation process but thanks to Democrats and this experience, he’s understandably a far right-winger now.